Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 01-25-1993AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, January 25, 1993 - 7 p.m. Mayor: Ken Maus Council Memhers: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Clint Herhst, Patty Olsen 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held January 11, 1993. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. 4. Consideration of rezoning balance of Cardinal Hills development area from AO (agriculture -open space) to R-1 (single family residential). Applicant, Value Plus Humes. 5. Consideration of new offer from George Phillips and the Land Projects Partnership regarding sale of 7th Street remnant parcel. 6. Review Hockey Association plans/alternatives for development of indoor ice arena. 7. Consideration of granting a nun -intoxicating malt liquor license --Little Mountain Billiards. N. Report. on 1992 Senior Citizen Center activities. 9. Consideration of storm water study for the Meadow Oak pond outlet. Ill. Consideration of an ordinance amendmentdeclaring all City -owned huildings and vehicles "smoke free." 11. Consideration of adding it new employee to the water and sewer collection departments. 12. Consideration of hills for the month of January. 13. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING . MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, January 11, 1993 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Patty Olsen Members Absent: Ken Maus IA. Aonointment of Acting Mayor. Rick Wolfsteller requested that as a first item of business, the City Council consider appointing an Acting Mayor. Wolfsteller noted that Acting Mayor serves in the absence of the Mayor. A motion was then made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to appoint Shirley Anderson as Acting Mayor. Shirley Anderson stated that she would accept the position of Acting Mayor. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to approve the appointment of Shirley Anderson as Acting Mayor. Motion carried unanimously. 2. Annroval of minutes of the regular meeting held December 14. 1992. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held December 14, 1992, as written. Motion carried unanimously. Citizens comments/uetitions. reauest.s, and comnlaints. None forthcoming. 4. Considernt.ion of reuuest to renlat four (4) existing townhouse lots into three (3) townhouse lots. Cary Anderson reviewed the proposal to replat Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, Fairway Courts, into three lots rather than the existing four lots. Gary Anderson noted that the proposed replat meets city requirements. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Patty Olsen to approve the replat of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, Fairway Courts, as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Page ] �\ r �. Council Minutes - 1/1V93 6. Consideration of a rezoninat reuuest for phase 111 and the balance of the undeveloped portion of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision plat frrrn AO (mrriculture-poen space) to R-1 (sina:le family residential). Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, reported that in conjunction with the application for preliminary plat approval for phase 111 of Cardinal Hills, Value Plus Homes is requesting that the balance of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision be rezoned from AO (agriculture -open space) to R-1 (single family residential) designation. O'Neill noted that this request is different from previous rezoning requests relating to Cardinal Hills because this time the developer is requesting that the balance of the Cardinal Hills development site be rezoned. Previously, the City has rezoned only that portion of the development that is being platted and developed. Rezoning was encouraged to occur only on an incremental basis to this point because of the concern over the potential of development of the entire property under one type of housing style and value. It was thought that by preserving the balance of the property under agricultural zoning status, the City could buy time to review its zoning district regulations and its housing stock inventory to determine if a new type of zoning district should be developed and assigned to the east side of Carinal Hills. The new zoning district would be designed to encourage development of higher valued homes at least in a portion of the Cardinal Hills development area. O'Neill repurted that the City Planner supports the rezoning of the entire property as proposed by the developer. The Planner stated that some cities do regulate the housing stock in the community and that this is done commonly by establishing a zoning district that requires development of larger Iota ( 16,000 sq ft is common). By requiring a larger lot, the utility prices increase and, concurrently, the value of the home tends to increase along with the higher development cost. The Planner also noted that cities typically initiate this type of specific zoning to assure a mix of housing types throughout the city and is generally utilized to provide areas for "move -up housing." Crittman noted that in the city of Monticello, there are relatively large areas of land that remain undeveloped that can he developed to satisfy the "move up" housing demand. He did not feel that there was an overriding need to regulate the type of development in the Cardinal Hills area for the sake of the city as a whole, as there are other areas within the city where higher -end housing can flourish. O'Neill reported that the Planner stressed that even though the house values in Cardinal [fills and associated tax revenue are relatively low as compared to the costs associated with providing public services, education, etc., he noted that the Lidded lot sizes and nearby amenities will add "staying power" to the development and will likely result in property owners making long-term Page 2 Council Minutes - 1/1 V93 commitments and investments in their property. He also noted that there are many intangible benefits to the Cit_: caused by development is this area. ^:civ residents will help support the existing commercial base within the community, and the added population and employee base will serve to help attract and maintain industry. Finally, even after rezoning the balance of the property w R-1, the City still has the option of changing the zoning again if the need is finally determined. Brad Fyle noted that the rezoning of the phase III of Cardinal Hills is appropriate at this time but was not convinced that the rezoning of the balance of the property was appropriate. Clint Herbst asked if rezoning to R-1 would result in the chance that commercial use could be developed at the site. O'Neill noted that commercial uses are not allowed in an R-1 zone; therefore, it would not be possible to develop commercial business at this location. After discussion, a motion was made by Patty Olsen and seconded by Brad Fyle to approve the proposed rezoning of the area indicated in phase III of Cardinal Hills from AO zoning district to R-1 zoning district and table consideration of phase III and authorize City staff to conduct additional research on the implications of rezoning the balance of the property encompassing the Cardinal Hills subdivision. Motion was based on the finding that the proposed rezoning of phase III of Cardinal Hills subdivision is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the geography and character of the area. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Patty Olsen. Opposed: Shirley Anderson. Rick Wolfsteller noted that the formal approval of the rezoning request for phase III of Cardinal Hills requires a 4/5 vow of approval by the Council. Wolfsteller asked Councilmember Anderson if she was in support of the rezoning for phase III for Cardinal Hills. If so, the previous motion should be amended by separating it into two separate motions. After discussion, a motion was made by Patty Olsen and seconded by Brad Fyle w rescind the previous motion and approve the rezoning of phase 111 of the Cardinal Bills subdivision from AO (agriculture -open space) to R-1 (single family residential). Motion was based on the finding that the proposed rezoning of phase III of Cardinal Hills subdivision is consistent with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the geography and character of the area. Motion carried unanimously. Page 3 Council Minutes - 1/11/93 A motion was made by Patty Olsen and seconded by Brad Fyle to table further ,,rnsideratian of the req: cal rc-zonc the ha!anc_ of the Cardinal Hills property from AO to R-1 zoning designation and authorize City staff to conduct additional research on the implications of rezoning the balance of the property encompassing the Cardinal Hills subdivision. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle. Clint Herbst, Patty Olsen. Opposed: Shirley Anderson. SEE ORDINANCE; AMENDMENT NO. 234. Consideration of aooroval of oreliminary slat of Dhase III. Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. ADDlicant. Value Plus Homes. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that Value Plus Homes, Inc., of Monticello requests the City consider approval of the third phase of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. O'Neill went on to review the proposal in terms of the city ordinance and noted that the preliminary plat meets the minimum requirements of the city ordinance. Discussion focused on the park dedication requirement associated with the third phase of the Cardinal Hills development. O'Neill noted that the developers are requesting that they pay cash in lieu of land dedication for the unsatisfied portion of the park dedication requirement. O'Neill reported that the Planning Commission recommended that the City accept cash in lieu of park land dedication for the third phase of the development but make no commitment on the overall park dedication requirement on the remaining acreage until additional review by the Parks Commission. O'Neill also noted that sidewalk and pedestrian issues had been reviewed at a recent meeting between City and School officials, the local developer, and the local bus companies. It was the consensus of the group that a sidewalk should N., installed along the northern side of School Boulevard. The group also discussed crosswalk locations. It was the consensus that crosswalk locations should he identified at Elder Lane and Pelican Lane, which would be in addition to the existing crosswalk at the northwest comer of Cardinal Hills Park. Brad Fyle asked if the tree planting requirement was met in phases I and II. He had received complaints from home owners that the trees planted were too immature. O'Neill noted that he would investigate and determine if the trees planted met the requirements of the development agreement. Roger %lack suggested that Martin Drive noted on phase Ill be renamed because it does not connect directly to Martin Drive located in phase I. Page 4 C� Council Minutes - 1/11/93 After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Patty Olsen, to approve the preliminar; plat of phase 111 of Cardinal Hills development and accept cash in lieu of land to satisfy the park dedication requirement for phase III only and direct the Parks Commission to review the park dedication issue for the balance of the property. Staff is directed to provide alternatives for amending the current sidewalk policy in conjunction with the potential development of the School Boulevard sidewalk. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Chapter 3, General Provisions, of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance by adding 3-2, "Communication Devices," which would allow and reculate the operation of satellite dish/communication devices. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the proposed ordinance amendment was requested by the Planning Commission but originally stems from a request by a home owner to install a satellite dish. Technically, installation of a satellite dish is not permissible, as it is not identified in the city ordinance as an allowable use in any zoning district. The proposed ordinance amendment is geared to control placement of devices in areas and in a manner that will cause minimal impact on adjoining properties. It includes a provision for a conditional use permit that would be required when minimum requirements cannot be met. The ordinance proposed is very similar to ordinances adopted by other communities. Shirley Anderson noted that in her view the proposed ordinance is essentially an update to our existing ordinance and is essentially a necessary housekeeping matter. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Patty Olsen to approve the ordinance amendment as proposed based on the finding that the rule will serve to protect the safety mid character of areas in which communication devices are located. Motion carried unanimously. SI?E ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 235. 8. Consideration of aourovine renewal of Joint Fire Department contracts for Silver Creek Townshin and City of Otsego. (tick Wolfsteller informed Council that the Joint Fire 13oard has recommended that the City establish a one-year contract with Silver Creek Township and the City of Otsego to he paid al a rate of $25 per parcel. Wolfsteller reported that the fire department has provided adequate service of the western portion of the City of Otsego and has experienced G fires this past year. The department has also been called out 16 times to Silver Creek Township. Based on the number of calls, $25 per parcel is adequate to cover the cost of serving the area. Page 5 C� Council Minutes - 1/11/93 After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Clint Herbst to 2pprove renevAng the fire protection contract With the City of Otsego and Silver Creek Township. The annual charge for Otsego is estimated at $68,000, and the charge to Silver Creek Township is $11,750. Motion carried unanimously. 9. Consideration of annual auvointments for 1993. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Patty Olsen to approve the annual appointments for 1993 as follows: Official Depositories: Wright County State Bank Page 6 C� Security Financial Savings & Loan First National Bank of Monticello Chief Financial Officer authorized to designate other depositories for investment purposes only. Newspaper: Monticello Times Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. Tom St. Hilaire 12196 (5 -yr staggered terms) 2. Ben Smith 12195 3. Bud Schrupp 12/94 4. Al Larson 12/93 5. Everette Ellison 12/97 Planning Commission: 1. Richard Carlson 2. Jon Bocart 3. Cindy Lemm 4. Richard Martie 5. Brian Stumpf Health Officer: Dr. Donald Maus (1 year) Acting Mayor: Shirley Anderson (1 year) Joint Commissions: Community Education: Shirley Anderson Fire 11oard hick Wolfsteller OAA Ken Maus Page 6 C� Council Minutes - 1/1 V93 Library Board: 1. Ed Solberg 12/93 f3-}: staggered) 2. Duff Davidson•. 12/94 3. Mary Jane Puncochar 12/93 4. Ruby Benson 12/94 5. Rebecca Jesinski 12/95 Attorney: Paul Weinearden Planner: Northwest Assoc. Consultants Auditor: Gruvs. Borden. Carlson & Assoc Recycling Committee: Shirlev Anderson Economic Development Authority: 1. Pattv Olsen, Council 12/96 2. Clint Herbst, Council 12/94 3. Harvey Kendall 12/96 4. A] Larson 12/97 5. Barb Schwientek 12/93 6. Bob Mosford 12/94 7. Ron Hoglund 12/95 Engineer: Orr-Schelen-Maveron & Associates Police Advisory Commission: Brad Fyle, Council 12/94 (3 -yr staggered terms) Warren Smith 12/94 David Gerads 12/94 Jim Fleming 12/95 Curtis Schmidt 12/93 Parks Coin mission: Dick Frio 12/93 (3 -yr staggered terms) Larry Nolan 12/93 Fran Fair 12/94 Bruce Thielen 12/95 Roger Carlson 12/95 Motion carried unanimously. Page 7 ` Council Minutes - 1/1 V93 10. Consideration of enterine into a ioint venture with the cities of Elk River and Buffalo for purchase of crack sealing equipment for the street department. John Simola reported that the cities of Buffalo, Elk River, and Monticello are utilizing a rubberized crack sealer. Simola noted that the City began using ruh4etized crack sealer for bituminous pavements in 1990. We are expecting a 6-7 year life expectancy or more out of the crack sealer, which is very similar to the period of time between sealcoats; therefore, we are generally crack sealing just prior to sealcoating. Simola went on to note that an opportunity is in place to save on crack sealing costs by jointly purchasing crack sealing equipment to be shared by the three communities. Simola noted that the public works departments from the three cities have gotten along quite well over the past years. We have brought some equipment back and forth and shared technical knowledge on various aspects of public works. It, therefore, seemed logical that a joint venture of some type be considered for purchasing this equipment. Simola concluded by noting that the City of Monticello's total share of the joint venture is $9,490. With the joint venture as proposed, it looks like we will he under budget by in excess of $5,000. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve a joint venture between the cities of Buffalo, Monticello, and Elk River and to authorize purchase of the Crafco E -Z Pour 200 Melter with pump and gravity feed and spare parts from Spec Materials, Inc., for $16,990 including sales tax, and to purchase the Crafco Model 200 24 -HP router with five sets of carbide tip cutters from Spec Materials, Inc., for $7,468 including lax, contingent upon receiving guarantee of payment of their share from the cities of Buffalo and Elk River, leaving the amount spent by the City of Monticello at $9.490. Motion carried unanimously. 11. Review vreliminary plans for imurovement to eastbound Countv State Aid Hiehwav 75 (East. Broadwav) from Hiehwav 25 to hiah school. .John Simoln reported that the last major improvement to eastbound East Broadway was completed by MN/DOT in 1960. Some 20 years later in 1991, well after the state turned the Highway 152 back to Wright County, the highway surfaces were in poor condition. The County decided to mill off or remove the top `l inches of the 5 1/2 inch street surface on eastbound 75 and replace it with tui overlay. This resulted in a like -new street surface; however, within 2 years, 951� of the previous cracking had reoccurred. Consequently, this type of surface treatment was deemed inappropriate for a long-term solution. Page 8 �'� Council Minutes - 1/11/93 In 1988 and 1989, the City began to receive complaints from residents along Fast Broadway about the noise trucks made as they bounced along the street. By this time, the cracking had reached a point where the County began considering replacement. The City approached the County Board in 1990 asking them to resurface the road, as there were funds available in the County's municipal state aid fund. The County felt, however, that although the road was in poor condition, there were other roads in the county that had higher priority. The City was concerned that after they became a direct municipal state aid city that the County's municipal state aid funds would no longer be available for improving County Road 75. The County Engineer, however, promised they would do the project in the next 2-3 years. Simola reported that we find ourselves in 1993 with the proposed project schedu!ed for late summer. Simola reported that the County is considering specifying a 3 -week time schedule to keep business disruption at a minimum. The project will consist of complete removal of the blacktop surface, shaping, and compacting the class V and then 5 inches of new blacktop. The City will also be installing a storm sewer in the first block of East Broadway in the area of Ernic's Bait to relieve a drainage problem. We will also be replacing approximately 1/4 mile of curbing. The City's share of the project is estimated at $30,000, which is our budget figure for 1993. Sinola also went on to discuss concerns regarding individual sewer service lines along Broadway. He noted that residents could save $100 or more by repairing their sanitary services prior to the project being completed, as they would not have to replace the blacktop surface. He noted that the question becomes which services, if any, need repair, and are repairs needed to the portion of the sanitary sewer service lines lying in eastbound 75. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the preliminary plans for the improvement project and to offer free sanitary sewer service inspection at no cost to any of the 60+ residents along East Broadway from Highway 25 to the high school affected and who has had hist problems or perceives problems with their sanitary sewer service. This is provided that the resident cleans or has the service clenned prior to the tv inspection. Motion carried unanimously. .John Simola thanked County 13oard member, Pat Sawatxke, for supporting this prgtect Lit the County Board level. Brad Nyle requested that the project he completed in as short a time frame as possible. Page 9 I Council Minutes - U11/93 12. Consideration of calling a saecial meeting for reviewing computer system oneralion. Assistant Administrator O'Neill invited Council to consider calling a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the current computer system configuration and operation. The meeting will consist of a review of the system, along with a visit to each computer terminal work site. The goal of the meeting will be to provide Council with updated information on the status of each software product purchased by the City and how the software is being used to improve information management. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to meet on January 27, 1993, at 4:30 p.m. 13. Consideration of bills for the last half of December. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve payment of the bills as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 14. Other matters. A. Clint Herbst noted that long-term parking is occurring at the sliding hill parking lot. He was contented that commuter parking is occurring at this site. John Simola reported that he would post a 'no commuter parking" sign at the site. Assiswnt Administrator O'Neill requested that the Council consider allowing plat development site grading to he included with the associated public improvement projects ordered by the City. O'Neill noted that combining the previous separate site grading activities would allow better coordination of grading activities and reduces overall development cost. He also noted that under the current method, the City must wait for the private developer to complete grading activities prior to the City starting street and utilities construction. This arrangement adds risk because it does not guarantee that the actual grading will he done on a timely basis; and potentially, a project ordered by the City could be delayed because the private developer, for whatever reason, has not leen able to complete the grading. Including grading in the overall project would be beneficial, as it would also guarantee that the complete grading of the site and restoration is done in accordance, with original plans. From time to time, the City has had a problem with getting developers to complete the grading of individual parcels as identified in the original plans. Including grading in the overall project. would eliminate this problem. Page 10 Council Minutes - 1/1 V93 O'Neill noted that payments for plat development grading expenses would be made by the private developer as the work is completed. Plat development grading costs would, therefore, not be included in the assessments against the property. Prior to initiating the public improvement project, the City would require a letter of credit or other financial security that would guarantee that the cost associated with the plat development grading be paid immediately after completion. The City would, therefore, not bond for any grading cost and would not include the cost in the assessment roll. Clint Herbst noted that he has no problem with the proposal as long as the developers fund the plat development grading cost upfront as they normally would have done had they completed the grading completely on a private basis. It was the general consensus of Council to include grading activity in public improvements with the condition that the City obtain a financial guarantee that the plat development grading be funded directly by the developer and paid separate from the assessment roll. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 11 /'— Council Agenda - 1/2.5/93 4. Consideration of rezoning balance of Cardinal Hills orooerty from AO (a_riculture-open space) to R-1 (sincle faxnily residential). AaelicanL Value Plus Homes. GLO.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND At the previous meeting, Council approved rezoning phase III of Cardinal Hills (21 acres) but tabled rezoning the balance of the property (approximately 54 acres) pending input from the City Attorney on development of a resolution Supp )rting denial of the rezoning request. In turn, I have asked Paul Weingarden to review the matter. He has prepared two resolutions, one in support and one rejecting the request. Council is asked to select one. As a supplement to this agenda item, I would like to address a concern expressed by some regarding development of the area. The concern is that the Cardinal Hills area will have the same problems as occurred in a subdivision on the west edge of town. Following is a list of the problems experienced with developments in the late 70's and early 80's and how rules/standards have changed to effectively address the problems. Home Fundina Proarams The mortgage program that spawned the new homes in 1979-198J (approx. dates) had few requirements for individuals that wanted a home. The minimum income level to qualify was very low or non-existent. The people least. I ikely to he able to maintain a home were the ones that were able to have it home. The funding program suPporting Cardinal Hills development, is much different. I n order toohtain a mortgage, a household mustnteet minimum and maximum income criteria. Only people with solid jobs and gtxd credit can obtain li nuncing. Outside Rloraee/Gnraee I n 1979, there was no requirement that each home have a two -car garage. I n addition, the funding program supporting development of the homes lit that time did not allow garages. The result --outside storage ofhikes, mowers, grills, rakes, etc. To compound the problem, many of the homes were placed in the middle of the lot, making it difficult to add in garage Inter. Also, driveway development typically included n narrow patch of asphalt for one ear. Two -car households ended up parking on grass areas, creating ruts and bare spots, which further detracted from the neighborhood. Council Agenda - 1/25/93 The City has updated its ordinances relating to outside storage to the benefit of CardinalIlillsand 41tureumrgiog neighborhoods. Two-cargaragesarenow required, which results in less outside storage. Driveways are wide enough for two cars, which reduces lawn parking. Minimum standards for storage buildings have been established. The beneficial effects of these standards on the Cardinal Hills neighborhood are evident. City Utilities/Parks Some of the developments that occurred in the 1970's did not have curbed streets and were developed under a rural design. All new subdivisions have curb and gutter --no ditches in the front. Park development in the 70's was poorly conceived; all of the parks west of Pinewood School are either in a wetland, drainage basin, or are under power lines. This situation will not occur at Cardinal Hills. In summary, although the Cardinal Hills development area is made up primarily of starter homes, it must follow higher development standards, which sets it apart from developments of the 70's and early 80's. 13, ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Motion to adopt a resolution denying the rezoning request. As is noted in the following resolution, the main reason for denial of rezoning of the bit lmtcc of the property is the fact that the area will not hove immediate access to city utility systems. It could be argued that the area should not be rezoned until utilities are extended to the perimeter of the site. Utilities will be extended to the perimeter only after phnse II I is completed. In the past., Council hits zoned property for residential uses prior to actual extension of utilities. For example, the entire Meadow Oak area was zoned PU 1) before utilities were extended. Also, the entire property (72 acres) owned by Bob Krautbauer was zoned R -I from AO even though only a small portion of it had direct access to sewer and water. These ore just examples of situations where rezoning from agriculture hits (occurred without. the Site having direct access to city utility lines. The I wo exiunples above are for reference only; they du not act as precedents obligating you to apply the same standard to the Cardinal Hills situation. Council Agenda - 1/25/93 According to Paul, this alternative is defensible in court. RESOLUTION DENYING REZONING Resolve that the application for rezoning of the Cardinal Hills property by the applicant he denied on the basis that: 1. The area is not yet appropriate for residential uses for the following reasons: a. The City does not intend to extend sewer and water utilities to the site in the near future which is essential for residential development; and h. Based on existing housing patterns, the City believes that adding additional R -I zoned property at this location is premature and not in the best interest of the City at the present time; and C. The present use of the property for agricultural purposes is consistent with other surrounding uses at this time. d. The request is inconsistent with comprehensive plan goals to control the development of residential development to coincide with need and the availability of public services. 2. Motion to adopt it resolution approving the rezoning. Under this alternative, Council is comfortable with rezoning the property from AO to R -l. This alternative requires a 4/5 vote of Council to pass. I(ESOLUTION APPROVING ItEW)NING Itesolve that the application for rezoning of the Cardinal Hills property as requested by the applicant he approved for the following reasons; 1 . The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 2. The area is ripe fur development in it manner consistent with R-1 uses; or 3 Council Agenda - 1/25/93 3. Although not ripe for development, it appears that future uses of the property will be R-1 uses, and rezoning at this time will prevent the possibility of agricultural uses developing in conflict with an area that will eventually become residential. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is our view that reasons supporting the rezoning outweigh reasons for denial. The area is ripe for residential development. The reality is that utilities will soon be available to the site with completion of phase III. Although the chance of development of an agricultural use on the site is remote, the rezoning to R-1 blocks development of land uses allowed only in agricultural areas. Rezoning Lite site to R -I does not limit the ability of the City to modify district regulations and the zoning map in the future. For instance, if Council so desires, staff can research the possibility of creating a modified R -I zone which would require larger lot sizes and higher standards for development. The new regulations and modifications to the zoning map could be applied to the balance of the Cardinal Hills area before phase IV is platted. It is our view the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The land use plan in the comprehensive plan clearly shows this area to he residential. D. SUPPORTING DATA Comprehensive plan excerpts; Ag zoning district regulations. City of Monticello Chelsea Area I.and Use and Circulation Study ADOPTED TED �14A Pr lll>rls(cd I a n(I Use jl� T nw Ilr truly Ifr• ilrnlUl I 1 hrflilutnin l Q hlrrlu urr ll�•n��ly ltrwlrrll�.J m --t: J>inluir.il ni�n�r�i.rl ply(`""' / %� �> Ihhlr n.�n��l} llr air6•rNr�l h�Irwdy I-r>n•nr•rr wi /. .,��' -- ��\/'>i rl `�r�\(� � t�� "•r` J� ��\�},.na•• Ilrlrnr 1>.�,r ® Irtf�! o�ri<r,lrr.,l ,..� _../ !u �'�•�� t/�1 \ / .:�{,_.. � ...,/t�..� Ite1�>Ami�.r{(i H.. -Y 4kAi�i rr�i j. �7 fI //ice 1t„\�,I,� ti I'I�inrrl lbril Ilrl rl�grinrnl / rCL rr rj tti� i� w I ate•• l �I i��`c'��i�.........--�,'.. .,� ''•��:'���.���.'`�.?'ice II I Sub 14�f ?(.CAS - — P.Poi1C1 ?, " wQ'LG.-1 15 YY C'o^ I, sfr-1At1% 10. New forms of family structure, such as - Single Parents - Same Sex Couples - Growing Elderly Class will continue to increase and must be addressed with respect to housing needs. 11. The following trends can be anticipated for the future private economy of the county. - Expanding and changing housing base - teas dependence upon the agricultural economy (decreasing number of farms but larger farm acreages) - Expanding employment opportunities - Increasing family income - Increasing numbers of women in the labor force - Increasing proportion of residents commuting outside the area to places of employment 1 - Service industries should continue to increase in total numbers and dollar sales - Continued industrial growth - Continued manufacturing trade expansion 12. Anticipated population growth and changes in the private economy will result in the corresponding changes in the public economyx - Continued rise in assessed valuation - Continued rise in cost and expenditures for public services - More emphasis upon financial as well as physical planning - Growing need for changes in the tax structure and sources of revenue - possibility of higher per capita public service costo - Additional full-time public omployces COMMUNITY DT E'VELOPMENf GOALS r For the Comprohonoive Plan to validly function, it must be based on \\`/ an understanding of the aspirations held by the citizens for their community. The community goals are preferences as to: (1) the general type of community that future physical development should help produce; and (2) the character and location of the major physical elements forming the urban environment. Before the Comprehensive Plan can be carried into effect, these i t♦L.A community goals must oe stated clearly and general agreewent on Lhem must be reached. Otherwise, the plan cannot be conceived of as the community's policy concerning physical development. Investigating community attitudes and formulating a publicly acceptable statement of broad community goals is a basic part of the planning process. A L OAA •5� .goal" is a desired objective to be reached. !. To develop and emphasize Monticello as a community that can p. offer the advantages of being near a metropolitan area for the enjoyment of major cultural, sports, and business assets and yet be completely and distinctly separate from the metropolitan area 11 and its suburbs. D f 2. Tb encourage steady, careful growth by maintaining reasonably high standards. 3. To utilize the inherent advantages of the community in terms of location, existing population, school system, available land, etc., to gain the best possible advantage from these assets so as to develop a reputation as a community combining all the desirable elements for living in Minnesota. 4. To develop the City according to an officially adopted Comprehensive Plan for land use, transportation, and community facilities. While the plan should not be inflexible, neither should it be amended indiscriminantly. 5. To develop urban land uses according to a set of uniform standards applicable to the City. Such standards should govern land use, public improvements, health conditions, safety features, aesthetic considerations, and other elements of the urban environment for purposes of safeguarding the public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare. 6. To maintain a public imago which associates Monticello with excellence in planning, design, and structural quality. 7. To coordinate local plans with those of the school district, adjacent and nearby communities, and others, is essential to the well-being of local residents. 8. Tb develop a sound and broad tax base for the City and the school district is essential In order to provide revenue for adequate public facilitiao and cervices without creating undue burdens upon property owners. 9. Tb base all development decisions upon compliance with the City Plan, appropriate planning methods and procedures, and development standards that help to aoouro the boot possible reaults within the realm of economic and legal feasibility. -38- 10. To make major public expenditures according to a capital improvements program and budget which establishes priority schedules for five or six years in advance based on projections of need and estimated revenues. 11. To encourage suitable housing in goof living environments for people of all ages, incomes, and racial and ethnic groups throughout Monticello. 12. To allow development of new housing only where it is in harmony with the natural environment and where adequate services and facilities are available. 13. To eliminate all instances of housing blight (dilapidation, poor maintenance, etc.) as rapidly as possible. 14. To concentrate commercial enterprises into relatively compact and well-planned areas by discouraging •spot' and 'strip' business development. 15. To encourage the development of a strong industrial employment base so that persons can live and work in Monticello. 16. To develop high quality industrial areas which are free from nuisance characteristics ouch as noise, smoke, odore, vibrations, glare, dust, and other objectionable features. 17. To purchase recreation sites for long-range needs at an early date in order that proper sites can be obtained before urban development or land coats render acquisition hopolosb. 18. To develop public utilities and services that are well planned and coat -effective for present and future needs at the lowest possible operating and maintenance costa. 19. To evaluate present and future traffic flow volumoo in order to develop various land uoe otrategiea to prevent congestion on the public streeto. 20. To protect reoidential areas by channeling major traffic volumes onto a relatively few major streets. _39- lYJ CC VUNITY DEVELOPMENT POLICIES A 'policy' is an official course of action adopted either legislatively or administratively and followed by local government in striving to attain the desired community goals. The following policy statements are suggested for the City of Monticello. 1. The Comprehensive Plan is considered to be a flexible guide to decision making rather than an inflexible blueprint for development. The Plan will be continually reviewed and amended as necessary in the light of changing conditions and needs consistent with the aspirations of the citizens. Any proposed amendment of the Plan, however, must be equal to or an improvement over prior plans. 2. Broad citizen interest and participation in the planning process will be encouraged. 3. The principle of representative government will be maintained in the local neighborhood sentiment but will not be the sole factor considered in evaluating development proposals. Sound planning principles based upon factual evidence will be the primary consideration. /. The function of the Planning Commission shall be to: maintain the City Plan; make recommendations on development proposals (private and public); serve to provide the general public with information necessary to intelligent decision making; consider aesthetic as well as dollar costs and values; and serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council. 5. Urban development guides and controls shall be efficiently and properly administered by City staff and/or consultants. 6. Any proposed change in zoning, subdivision practice, or other development, but which is not consistent with the City Plan, shall not be considered until there has been an amendment to that Plan, said amendment to be reviewed and noted by the Planning Commission. 7. All land uses should be located so as to relate properly to surrounding land uses and the general land use pattern of the urban area. In general, similar type land uses should be grouped to serve as functional units. 8. The guiding factor in land use control should be the consideration of density. Such standards are to be incorporated in the zoning regulations and govern dwelling units permitted per acre; traffic generation elements, and the like. The control of density is the key factor in planning for utilities, streets, and other facilities which have a relationship between capacity and demand. -40- 9. Aesthetics and good urban design shall be an important factor in evaluating development proposals although these will not be the sole determinants leading to rejection or approval of proposed projects. In the making of urban development decisions, many factors will be taken into consideration including the following: (a) effect on adjacent and nearby property values; (b) safety factors; (c) health consideration; (d) landscaping; (e) light and air space; (f) traffic generation and flow patterns; (g) density and intensity of use; and (h) other items affecting the public welfare. 10. Encourage the preservation of special scenic and/or historical interest sites in their original state, if at all practicable and feasible. 11. The tax structure must be a factor in planning the industrial and commercial uses permitted by the City. 12. Flood plain zoning should be considered for areas subject to excessive water and run-off or potential flooding. The objective is to preserve space for proper storm drainage, avoid property damage, prevent soil erosion, and preserve scenic and recreational values. 13. The development and maintenance of public buildings and land should set a high standard and good example for private property owners to follow. 14. All land should be free from noxious weeds, litter, debris, inoperative vehicles, junk, hazards, and other undesirable influences. 15. Require precautionary measures to insure that soil erosion will be minimized to the greatest extent possible during development construction. i 16. Smoke, noise, dust, litter, vibrations, weeds, soils, erosion, junk, and other undesirable elements must be controlled by 'performance standards' in the zoning regulations and other codes and ordinances. 17. Adopt an Official Nap designating proposed major public spaces and corridors. t r -41- -42- rnort So SUBDIVISION POLICIES ?.e 1. All subdivisions should conform to the Comprehensive Plan (land use, transportation, and community facilities) of the community. 2. All land developments should be controlled in a tngical and practical way through the planning process so as to gradually develop the land utilizing its advantages yet being sensitive to existing natural features worth saving for the future. 7. Emphasis shall be given to contiguous development accentuating the homogenous nature of the community rather than a patchwork of localized and unrelated projects, and discourage the extension of public utilities to this non-contiguous development, thereby discouraging 'leap frog' development. 4. All subdivisions, no matter how small, should be planned in such a manner as to allow proper subdivision of surrounding land at a future date; a preliminary plan for the potential subdivision of the surrounding sites should be prepared regardless of dwnership involved to assure that the smaller subdivision will not conflict with future development potential. Where a subdivision is surrounded by previously platted land, said subdivision should be related to the existing conditions. 5. Land platted into larger lots should be so planned and developed as to permit proper re -subdivision in the future even in situations where further re -subdivision may not appear likely. 6. The subdivision regulations should contain adequate provisions for deviation from the strict application of the regulations to M allow reasonable flexibility and imaginative site design within intent the and purpose of zoning and subdivision regulations. 7. All lots should abut on a public street; access via privato Istreets or easements should not be permitted except where absolutely essential to the enjoyment of property rights. 8. Street names should be in accordance with a uniform street I naming and numbering system adopted by the City. 9. All lots and otreeto should be arranged no so to avoid inefficient land shapes (ouch as triangle) and sizes (such as vory narrow outlets). 10. All subdivision propooalo should be complotol that in, they should have paved streets, curb and gutter, all utilities, and public arena ouch as parka and playgrounds. 11. overhead utility lines and Wien should not be permitted. All utilities should be placed underground and should be along rear or aide lot linea when feasible. -42- 12. Subdivisions should be physically develored in full, urban density areas should be provided sanitary sewer, paved streets, curb and gutter, public water and other improvements deemed necessary. 13. In the case of small subdivisions or multiple ownerships, the rnmplete subdividers or developers may not be required to install complete facilities provided it is demonstrated that this is clearly not feasible or practicable. Prior to final approval of all subdivisions, however, it shall be determined what improvements may be added by the community. when substantially developed, full facilities (sanitary sewer, public water, paved streets, etc.) should be added through action initiated by the community and assessed against the benefited properties. 14. Future subdivisions, whether residential, commercial, or industrial, shall be required to set aside public green space (parks, playgrounds, etc.) or cash in lieu of lend for public recreation in accordance with a uniform set of standards. -43- GENERAL HOUSING POLICIES In Monticello, urban planning should be designed to promote high standards for residential development and help to assure the best possible living environment. 1. The Planninq Commission, in coordination with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, will be advocates for reform of land use controls, increased housing funding, governmental and legislative changes, and in general, act to i cease public awareness of housing problems and solutions. rhe Commission will evaluate the City's regulatory codes and ordinances to insure that these regulations provide maximum opportunity to dew JaUa Lanae of housing types at various income levels and permit utilization of innovative site development and construction techniques] 2. Attempts will be made to develop and implement affirmative programs for open housing. Open housing is housing that is available to all persona without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or ethnic background. 3. New housing areas shall be provided utilities as they expand toward the perimeter of the City. 4. Residential uses should be permitted to mix with commercial or industrial uses unless it can be demonstrated that the residential and non-residential uses will be in conflict. 5. Developments shall be designed to reopect the natural features of the site to the maximum extent feasible. 6. Development proposals will be evaluated with respect to their potential effect upon adjacent and nearby developments and their effect upon the public welfare of the City and adjacent communities. 7. Dev elopmento must be developed according to wall conceived plant] that tend to unify and relate to each other; developments that are a hodge-podge and ill-conceived will be disapproved. 0. Within the OAA, a density of 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit will be promoted in the areas of utility service contiguous to the present city and in those areas where central utility service construction In contemplated within five yea rs. 9. Although anticipated dennitioe in areas capable of utility oervico within five years may be designed at 10,000 to 12,000 aquare feet of lot area per dwelling unit, building pormito aha ll not be issued for a density of more than one dwelling unit per 2.4 acres with on-oite newer nyotems based upon percolation too to. -44- 10. The existing density requirement (land area per dwelling units) as outlined in the zoning ordinance shall be continually reviewed to determine their appropriateness for adoption to changing times and conditions. 11. Appropriate urban renewal measures will be taken to assure maintenance of the existing housing supply in good to excellent condition. Suitable StdnJdrde Cur steacture and yard maintenance will be developed and enforced to help assure maintenance of residential neighborhoods in a sound condition. 12. All types of housing will be permitted including apartment structures, townhouses, and others; provided each is properly located according to the Comprehensive Plan, the site plans and structural quality (materials, workmanship, and design( are in accordance with the highest feasible standards, and each is in conformance with the provisions of the zoning ordinance. 13. where provisions for sanitary sewer are not contemplated in the near future (within five years), the density shall not exceed one dwelling unit per forty acres. The actual lots size per unit, however, may be as small as 2.5 acres subject to the provision of an approved individual on-site sewage system based upon percolation tests. Sinqle Family Housing Policies Home occupations will be permitted provided such activities are conducted in a manner which assumes that evidence of such occupation is not present. 2. Single family housing should not be allowed individual access to major thoroughfares but will orient toward minor residential streets. Multiple Family Housinq Policies Multiple Family Dwellings are recognized as being a worthwhile addition to the urban environment end tax base under conditions no established in the Comprehensive Plan and by zoning, subdivision, and other codes and ordinances. However, the Planning Commission will look with disfavor upon projects with design features that are conoidered Inappropriate, such no architectural deoigno that are incompatible with existing and proposed developments and unimaginative site docigns. 2. Multiple Dwelling projects shall be encouraged to develop as 'Planned Units' with specific plane submitted for structures, architectural design, landscaping, circulation, open space, recreation facilities, and any other features that may be proposed. -45- UTILITY POLICIES 1. As urban development proceeds, adequate plans will be made for the increased storm water run-off that can be expected; to the extent feasible, such water will be impounded to help recharge the area's ground water supply. Drainage plans will be coordinated on a watershed basis. 2. where on-site sewer and water facilities are to be used, soil percolation tests shall be required when considered necessary and there is evidence to indicate that larger lot sizes may be ■ required or development should be permitted for reasons of danger to the public and health. 1. Attempt to design and encourage the use of gravity flow for sanitary sewer systems rather than using lift stations and force mains for long-term sewage solutions. Lift stations and force mains may be appropriate as interim solutions to sewage problems that may be served by gravity flow at a later date. <. Select routes for utilities, either above or below ground, with careful regard for the preservation of natural resources, such as wetlands, extreme slopes, water sources, and other wildlife habitat. S. Restore the 'nature' of the land which has been altered by construction work to the extent possible as soon after construction ie completed. 6. Prohibit ext.nalon of sewer systems into areas where development should not occur, ouch as flood plains and designated open spaces.In certain instances, sewers may, of necessity, have to tr avers. such areas in order to serve upland areas. However, connection to the line should not be allowed in those areas. 7. Privately owned sanitary sewer systems should be prohibited. 6. Under certain circumstances, surface water run-off may require . consideration of a treatment system to secure the quality of effluent diachargeo into water bodies or waterways. 1 ' 9. Municipal utilities should not be extended beyond the corporate limits of the City. 10. The City shall actively participate in industrial and commercial growth to ensure conformance with treatment and pro -treatment requirements, in order to enhance maintenance and operation, and to protect and prolong the life expectancy of the wastewater Treatment Plan. 11. The extension of privately owned cover and water linea beyond an individual'a property line in order to tic into municipal mains shall be prohibited. -91- v ZOVING Figure 6 indicates the anticipated principal land uses of the City. The legal mechanism that controls or manages the development process is zoning, which is the use of the government's police power to regulate land use in order to promote and protect the public health, safety, and welfare. A Zoning Ordinance consists of both a zoning text and a zoning map. (Figure 11) The text describes the different districts and types of uses allowed in each district. The map delineates the various geographic districts within the community. A Zoning Ordinance divides the jurisdictional area into different districts such as residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural districts. These major districts are often divided into sub -districts for the purpose of segregating special uses within the major categories. For example, apartment units will be segregated from single family homes in the residential districts. Within an industrial district, heavy industry will be segregated from light industry. Within the commercial district, regional shopping centers will be segregated from neighborhood convenience shopping uses. It should be noted, however, that the quality of a zoning ordinance is not necessarily determined by the number of districts it contains. The number of districts is determined in part by the type of Comprehensive Plan and in part by the degree of urbanization that has taken place within the community. Some zoning ordinances contain many districts in order to reflect the conditions which existed at the time the ordinance was adopted. This is especially true within older communities. Zoning ordinances are not retroactive and therefore, land uaee existing at the time the ordinance was adopted and which do not conform to the ordinance are allowed to continue in a non -conforming basis. For example, a commercial use within a single family ' neighborhood which later was zoned for single family residential uses would be allowed to continue an a non -conforming use. Non -conforming uses are not usually permitted to expand by adding onto the building or otherwise upgrading the operation. In fact, moat juriodictiono prohibit the reconstruction of a non -conforming use if it in more than fifty percent (50%) destroyed by fire, lightning, or natural CaUne9. Scone communities have adopted proviaiona in their zoning ordinances which attempt to eliminate or amortize the nonconforming use over a ' period of time. The time period varieo and is dependent upon ouch factors as the amount of investment in the use, the loosen to the property owner due to the elimination, and the coat of relocation. The time period in usually shorter for uaee which may cause a nuioonce , such as junk yards, or unsafe and dilapidated billboards. Zoning is just one of the several devices used in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the zoning ordinance should be based upon and prepared in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan. Theprocedures for administering the zoning ordinance differ substantially between communities. Unfortunately, many communities -72- C� do not follow the proper procedures which often results in their decisions having been overturned by a court of law when challenged by prospective developers. For example, in those instances when public ' hearings are required, it is important not only to hold the public hearing but to follow the proper legal requirements for public notice in a legal newspaper. A common mistake in the application of the Zoning Code involves the double standard. For example, different procedures may be used depending upon whether the applicant is a long-time resident of the community or a developer. It should be emphasized that the law does not recognize differences between applicants and that the same procedures must be used regardless of the background and stature of the applicant. The following are some questions which should be raised when ' proposals for zoning amendments, variances, and conditional use permits are brought before the Planning Commission. ' ZONING AMENDMENT ZONING VARIANCE 1. Woo the zoning ordinance and ito otandardo and regulations lead to a practical difficulty or undue hardship on the part of the property owner in the uao of hia property? 71. qi 1. Has there been a change in the development policies of the community? 1 2. Has there been a change in the conditions in the community such A` as rapid population or development change? 7. Was there a mistake made in the development of the original ' ' n J`a`i zoning ordinance which needs to be corrected? 4. to the zoning ordinance up to date? 0 U R S. Does the propooed amendment conform to the intent of the Comprehensive Development Plan? 'v 7 6. Io the propooed uae compatible with adjacent land uses? \ti Q 7. To the propooed amendment and land uae likely to lead to a �y monopoly situation no as to amount to a opot zoning? 8. What io the affect of the propooed rezoning on ouch public utilitieo ao sanitary oewero, wator, roado, ochoolo? 9. Will the prop000d development place an undue financial burden on the local community? ZONING VARIANCE 1. Woo the zoning ordinance and ito otandardo and regulations lead to a practical difficulty or undue hardship on the part of the property owner in the uao of hia property? 71. qi CHAPTER 5 "A -O" AGRICULTURAL - OPEN SPACE DISTRICT SECTION: 5-1: Purpose 5-2: Permitted Uses 5-3: Permitted Accessory Uses 5-4: Conditional Uses 5-1: PURPOSE: The "A-0" agricultural -open space district is intended to provide a district which will allow suitable areas of the city to be retained and utilized in open space and/or agricultural uses, prevent scattered non-farm uses from developing improperly, secure economy in government expenditures for public utilities and service. 5-2: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in an "A-0" 1 district: 1p �` (A] Agriculture, including farm dwellings and agricultural /ll e related buildings and structures subject to Minnesota Pollution Control Standards, but not including �py commercial feed lots or other commercial operations. e. S [B] Public parks, recreational areas, wildlife areas, and Pe game refuges. [C] Nurseries and tree farms. [iN (D) Essential services. 2 O 5-3: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted "A accessory uses in an -O" district: (A] Operation and storage of such vehicles, equipment, and machinery which are incidental to permitted or conditional uses allowed in this district. [B] The boarding or renting of rooms to not more than two (2) persons. (C) Living quarters of persons employed on the premises. [D) Homo occupations. 5-4: CONDITIONAL USES: The following are conditional uses in an "A-0": (Requires a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Chapter 22 of this ordinance.) MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 5/1 'Lc.5 e. l7s e 5 Gr a c.l , •� � � � ^ 1 z C) V) Co....c,Q l�sP -eR,n.,• Z' . [A] Governmental and public utility buildings and structures necessary for the health, safety, and general welfare of the community provided that: 1. When abutting a residential use in a residential I'Y\) use district, the property is screened and e- - Gam\ b landscaped in compliance with Chapter 3, v Section 2 [G], of this ordinance. _ ` w O K 1� 2. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. [B) Commercial outdoor recreational areas, including golf '�•I A, n a4 e courses and club house, country clubs, swimming pools, and similar facilities provided that: j 1. The principal use, function, or activity is open, �� v '�` U I outdoor in character. I_ 2. Not more than five (5) percent of the land area of (� fi ►,e 5 the site be covered by buildings or structures. 3. When abutting a residential use and a residential use district, the property is screened and t 5 C) landscaped in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 (G), of this ordinance. 4. The land area of the property containing such use or activity meets the minimum established for the (/ districts. 5. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are r5_ considered and satisfactorily met. (C) Commercial riding stables, dog kennels, and similar uses provided that: 1. Animal building, holding, grazing, and exercise areas are located a minimum of one thousand (1,000) feet from any residential, commercial, or industrial use district. 2. The land area of the property containing such use of activity meets the minimum established for the district. 3. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. 4. All applicable requirements of tho State Pollution Control Agency are complied with. [D) Recreational, travel vehicle camp sites (not including mobile homes) provided that: MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 5/2 1. The land area of the property containing such use or activity meets the minimum established for the district. 2. The site be served by a major or arterial street capable of accommodating traffic which will be generated. 3. All driveways and parking areas be surfaced. 4. Plans for utilities and waste disposal shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and shall be subject to his approval, and all applicable requirements of the State Pollution Control Agency are complied with. 5. Not more than five (5) percent of the land area of the site be covered by buildings or structures. 6. The locations of such use be at minimum one hundred (100) feet from any abutting residential use district. 7. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with Chapter 3, Section 9, of this ordinance and shall not impact adjoining or surrounding residential uses. 8. The provisions of Chapter 22 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. Vol 5/3 Council Agenda - 1/25/93 s. Consideration of new offer from Georae Phillips and the Land Proiects Partnershiu rettardint; sale of 7th Street remnant parcel. UO.) A. RUERFNCE AND BACKGROUND Council is asked to consider a new offer to purchase the 7th Street remnant parcel submitted by George Phillips and his Partnership. They have increased their offer from $8,000 to $13,500 in response to the City's proposal to sell the property for $17,000. As you recall, the City Council established the $17,000 figure based on the original appraisal amount of $26,000 minus additional development cost, which includes soil correction and installation of sewer and water connections. Previous information submitted to you on December 14 is attached for your review. Suhscyuent to the new offer made by the Land Projects Partnership, on Thursday, .January 21, Gary Anderson, John Simola, and 1 met with Tim Anderson and Bruce Cagnelius regarding the potential sale of the 7th Street remnant parcel directly to the Monticello Insurance Agency. Anderson and Gagnelius would propose to build a 2,000 sq ft office huilding on the site. After sketching various huilding/parking configurations, it became evident that the parcel by itself, without additional land from the property to the north, would provide sufficient space to meet the needs of the Monticello Insurance Agency. Huth Anderson and Gagnelius indicated a strong interest in purchasing the land under the terms offered to George Phillips and the laud 1rojec49 I'arlaership. It. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Motion to accept offer of $13,600 subject to vacating process and call for it public hearing on vacation of the street right -of --way. This alternative dies not make sense hecause a potential buyer is interested in paying $17,000 for the property. Motion to deny acceptance of the 1'art.nership offer of $13,500 and re- state the previous City offer to sell the site to Land 1'rojects Partnership in the amount (if $17,000. Land Projects I'artnership would he given 7 days Io respond. If the offer is not accepted within 7 days, the same offer applies to Monticello Insurance Agency, with the second offer expiring 7 days lutea; and call for it public hearing un the vacatiuu of the 7th Street right-of-way scheduled for h'ehrunry 2:1, 1993. Council Agenda - 1/25193 Under this alternative, Land Projects Partnership would have the first crack at buying the land. If the Partnership turns down the offer, it can be sold directly to the Monticello Insurance Agency. Due to the fact that the Partnership owns the adjoining land, it would be fair to give them another opportunity to buy the land at the City's asking price. If the Partnership purchases the parcel, they would then have the opportunity to re -sell the land to the agency as is or improve the developability of the overall area by reconfiguring property lines as they see fit. Motion to offer the property for sale to the highest bidder or increase the price to sonic number above $17,000. Due to the fact that a buyer is present that might be willing to pay more than $17,000, the City could take a chance and increase the price. This alternative may not be worth the risk of losing a potential sale. Given the appraised value of $26,000 minus soil correction expenses and the cost to install utilities, it would appear that $17,000 is a fair asking price. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council select alternative i12, which is to sell the property to Land Projects Partnership in the amount of $17,000 and call for a public hearing on the vacation of the affected street right-of-way. If Land Projects Partnership turns down the property at this price, then it is likely that the Monticello Insurance Agency will accept the same offer. D. suiwRTING DATA: Minutes from meeting of December 14, 1992: Previous agenda item Council Minutes - 12/14/92 5. Consideration of an offer to purchase vacant 7th Street right-of-wav from Citv - Land Proiects Partnership. Rick Wolfsteller reported that in 1990 when 7th Street was extended, a realignment occurred at the intersection of Locust and 7th Street. The realignment resulted in a portion of 7th Street being no longer needed for street purposes. The total square footage of the 7th Street remnant area in question amounts to 11,000 sq ft and is located in what could be a very desirable commercial location at the corner of 7th and Locust. Land Projects Partnership owns the property directly to the north of the 7th Street parcel, and they have approached the City in the past as to the availability of the property and request that City Council consider selling the 11,000 sq ft parcel for $10,000. Wolfsteller noted that this item is for discussion purposes only, as the City needs to formally conduct a public hearing and officially vacate the 7th Street right-of-way before a transaction could occur. Wolfsteller reported that Land Projects Partnership obtained an appraisal from Jack Maxwell which indicated a value of $8,250. Likewise, the City had an appraisal completed on the property, and our appraisal indicates a value of $26,400. Wolfsteller stated that the property has potential for development of a small drive-through restaurant site or for a small office building but would probably achieve its highest and best use if combined with the property to the north as proposed by Land Projects Partnership. George Phillips, representing Land Projects Partnership, indicated that the City's appraisal is high, as the property has soil problems that will require correction prior to development. In addition, there are no sewer and water stubs serving the 7th Street parcel. He also noted that the value of Land Projects Partnership property has suffered because the realignment of 7th Street has now eliminated 7th Street access. Ken Maus noted that it makes sense for the City to sell the property, as it could encourage development; but at the same time, we want a fair price for the property for the sake of the community. Maus asked how have we established previous land values when it comes to vacating street right -of -way- -what have we done in the past? Rick Wolfsteller responded by stating that in the past, the price charged for vacated street right-of-way land has been linked to the market value of the land at the location of the street vacation. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to offer the property to Land Projects Partnership in the amount of $17,000, with the offer expiring in 30 days and subject to the street vacation process. Voting in favor: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. 0 Council Agenda - 12/14/92 s. Consideration of an offer to aurchase vacant 7th Street richt-of-wav from Citv--Land Proiects Partnershio. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND As part of the 7th Street extension to Minnesota Street to service the Kmart facility, the City obtained and realigned the right-of-way near the intersection of Locust and 7th Street (National Bushing Auto Parts corner). With the 7th Street realignment, the original 7th Street right-of-way will no longer be needed for street purposes. The total square footage of the area in question amounts to 10,999 sq ft and is located in what could be a very desirable area, the corner of 7th & Locust. Land Projects Partnership, consisting of George Phillips and Dale and Jim Lungwitz, are the owners of Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5, Block 7, property that is north of the 7th Street right-of-way in question. They have approached the City in the past inquiring as to the availability of this property and have recently requested that the City Council consider an offer of $10,000 for this 11,000 sq ft parcel. Council should be aware that before we could even sell the property, the City would have to hold a public hearing and officially vacate this 7th Street right-of-way. I assume vacation would not be a problem in that it would appear that it would not he needed for street right-of-way, although it could be used for other purposes such as storm pond retention area, etc. Land Projects Partnership obtained their own appraisal on the property in 1990 from Jack Maxwell, which indicated a value of $8,250. Likewise, on October 2.1, 1990, the City of Monticello felt it would be appropriate to obtain our own appraisal of this potentially valuable commercial property and utilized the services of St. Cloud Appraisal, Inc. The appraisal for the City indicated a value of $26,400, substantially higher than Mr. Maxwell's appraisal. The property in question certainly may have some limitations as to commercial usage because of its size limitations, but this does not mean that it could not be used for a small office building, drive-through fast food establishment, etc, and still meet city parking requirements. It would actually depend on what would he proposed; but we certainly do agree that 11,000 sq ft does have limitations. It has heen noted by Land Projects that our parcel does not have a sewer and water service connection to the site, and also they questioned whether soil conditions would need to be upgraded to support a structure. They Icel these two items would lower the value in our appraisal substantially. Council Agenda - 12/14/92 It is estimated that it may cost approximately $4,000 to pro%ide a sanitary sewer and water connection for this parcel. In addition, if the soil conditions would require removal and fill with good material to cover a building pad for a 2.000 sq fl building, it could cost an additional $5,000 to $6,000 for this work, depending on whether some of the black dirt could be sold. Taking these two amounts into account, there is logic to assume our $26,400 appraised value should possibly be lowered to $16,500 to $17,500 to account for these costs. Even so, the two appraisals are still quite far apart in value. As part of the 7th Street improvement project, this parcel would actually have 134 fl of frontage along 7th Street for which it has never been assessed. The assessment would have amounted to $7,100, which was included in the City's portion of the project cost originally. In my opinion, it seems somewhat unreasonable to have an appraisal that only has a value of $8,200 when it is to include over $7,100 of special assessments. In other words, before the street was constructed, the value would only have been $1,100. While the City has not had any other offers on this property, we have not actively marketed the property either. When considering the property in question, it may make sense that this smaller parcel should be combined with the property owned by Land Projects to provide adequate square footage for a larger commercial development. The only question then is what is a fair value for the Cites property? It is certainly my opinion that our 11,000 sq ft parcel has the best location in comparison to the adjacent property. It's located at what could he it prime intersection, Locust & 7th Street, with good visibility. I certainly realize that by itself, it does have limited uses and will possibly need soil correction for a building pad. Likewise, there is no real need immediately for the City to vacate this right-of-way and sell it, and possibly we should consider offering it joint partnership with the abutting property owner to combine both parcels if both parties would agree to share in the eventual sale price based on square footage contributed. I did mention this option to Mr. George Phillips, who indicated he would prefer the Council consider their offer of $10,000 outright for the purchase. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Council could indicate it willingness to sell the property for the price offered contingent upon holding a public hearing on the vacation of the 7th Street right -of way. ��l Council Agenda • 12/14/92 2. Council could indicate a willingness to sell the property but at a price more reflective of our own appraisal or $16,000 to $17,000. This price would be arrived at by deducting the cost of installing a sewer and water service at $4,000 and deducting the cost of soil corrections at $5,000 to $6,000 from the appraised value of $26,400. 3. Council could offer to enter into a partnership by agreeing to allow Land Projects to incorporate our parcel into a future sale with the City's renumeration to be equal in square footage price to what Land Projects would receive for their property. 4. Council could decide not to sell the property at this time and wait for a specific proposal either for our own parcel or for both parcels combined. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although the staff certainly realizes this property has some limitations, I think we also realize this could be an extremely valuable property with its location. From a future development standpoint, it certainly makes sense that this property may be more valuable if attached to a larger abutting property. The only problem the staff has is the eventual sale price. As 1 noted earlier, this parcel could have had a $7,100 street assessment, which seems to indicate the appraisal of $8,250 or even the $10,000 offer as being too low. I think if the City was to receive a fair value for this property, it may be a good idea to vacate the right-of-way and sell the property. I believe the property will have a value on the open market of closer to $17,000 rather than the $10,000 ofYer. Actually, their $10,000 offer maybe would be appropriate if the City had the right to assess the $7,100 for sheet improvements in addition. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of Land Projects appraisal; Copy of City's appraisal and map outlining properly; Written request from Land Projects for purchase. v e� �e 4 r, s63. h \` Q''-RO�jyfRtY - C 7 �z A � 4 W 1 N ; 0, �cp�•,t, j'.'''vE S 8 ti O� b E sr. SITS%� 0- 7.9 VA i 0 S b n � 6� V J � 2 r r a b h eb O� b E sr. SITS%� 0- 7.9 Council Agenda - 1/25/93 Review Hoekev Association Plans/alternatives for develoament of indoor ice arena. (J.O.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Jerry Nelson, representing the Hockey Association, will be in attendance to update the Council on the Hockey Association's research and potential plans/alternatives for pressing forward on development of an indoor ice arena. SUPPORTING DATA: Hockey Association research and planning documentation. MYHA MONT/CELL O YOU THHOCKEY.4SSOC/A TION 1997 INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSAL TO AIONT/CELL O C/TY COUNCIL JANUARY ?S, 1993 )OPESENT O FY .rEhRr'�vEL SON ,,WACAL UHAWX MYHA MONT/CELL O YOUTHHOCKEYASSOCIAT/ON 199.? WHO ARE W E . WE REPRESENT THE MONTICELLO YOUTH HOCKEY ASSOCIATION. HOWEVER, WE LIKE TO THINK THAT WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL IN MIND AS WE TRY TO ACCOMPLISH OUR GOAL. WHAT IS OUR GOAL. OURGOALISTOHAVEA COVERED SHEET OF ICE IN MONTICELLO BY NEXT OCTOBER. WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS AS A JOINT VENTURE WITH THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL SO AS TO MEET OUR IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND TO POSSIBLY FULFILL SOME NEEDS OF THE SCHOOL AND THE COMMUNITY. HOWEVER, AS I STATED EARLIER, AS THE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION WE WILL DO SOMETHING. AT THIS POINT WE HAVE BEEN DOING A LOT OF PRELIMINARY WORK IN GATHERING DATA ABOUT SHELTERS OR BUBBLES AND ABOUT BASIC BUILDINGS THAT WOULD BE FUNCTIONAL FOR HOCKEY. T' H i TOGETHER: IT IS CONSTANTLY BROUGHT UP ABOUT WHY DOESN'T THE CITY DO THIS, OR WHY DOESN'T THE S CHOOL DO THIS OR WHY DO WE HAVE TO INVOLVE THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL. ONE REASON, COST! IF WE GO TOGETHER WE CAN BUILD SOMETHING THAT WILL SATISFY ALL OF OUR NEEDS A LOT BETTER THAN IF WE DO IT ALONE. IF WE HAVE TO GO ALONE WE WILL BUT WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO PIECE MEAL IT TOGETHER AND THE TOTAL USE OF THE BUILDING WILL NOT BE REALIZED. MYHA MOAITIML O YOUTHHOCKEYASSOCIA RON 1999 WHY: FIRST AND FOREMOST IN OUR MINDS IS THE FACT THAT WE THE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION ARE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY IN TIME AND GAS BY TRAVELING TO MANY DIFFERENT CITIES. WE ARE ALSO SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON ICE RENTAL THAT COULD BE SPENT RIGHT HERE IN MONTICELLO. (SEE IMPACT CHART) WE ALSO SEE MANY OTHER BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE SCHOOL WHEN THIS FACILITY IS NOT BEING USED FOR HOCKEY. (SEE BENEFIT PAGES) WHO PAYS WHAT: A PROPOSAL THAT WE WOULD HAVE AT THIS TIME: (NOT EXACT OR DOWN TO THE PENNY) •HOCKEY ASSOCIATION -BORROW $300,000 TO 400,000 DOLLARS AND PROVIDE AS MUCH SWEAT EQUITY AS POSSIBLE. (ESTIMATED AT $200,000) •CITY -PROVIDE CAPITAL OUTLAY UP FRONT (APPROXIMATELY $400,000) •SCHOOL -PROVIDE LAND AND BE A TENANT IN THE RUILDING FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL TEAM GAMES AND PRACTICES. WHO OWNS AND WHO MANAGES WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY TAKE OWNERSHIP OF SUCH A BUILDING AND HAVE THE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION LEASE THE BUILDING BACK AND PROVIDE THE MANAGEMENT THROUGH A BUILDING BOARD THAT WOULD CONSIST OF HOCKEY PEOPLE, A CITY COUNCIL PERSON, PARK AND AEC PERSON AND A SCHOOL BOARD PERSON. C O N C L U S 10 N :OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS HAPPEN_ WE HOPE THAT YOU, THE COUNCIL CAN SEE THE BENEFITS AND WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE IT HAPPEN. PLEASE KEEP AN OPEN MIND AND LET'S SEE MONTICELLO ONCE AGAIN SHOW WHY IT IS 'YOUR KIND OF PLACE' ,MPACT CHART ON COMMUNiTY e.& a- I doer 1 0 ADULTS THAT LEAVE 0 AC-ULTS THAT STAY 0 0 A(-IJLTS WHIR WOULD STAT ) 343-7 E! ADULT'- %,H') 'i-MAE, LE W-1 r1 91 h :H.,;RT Sm0W':. THE N1,1NABEROF PEOPLE FRE iE! IT Ui LEAVE I F.-EP"i -1 -L IT' WE V -.-,:,t I LDHAVE.�� LOT 4.; TER T,:- .-TT ENDHO-. K E',' Pr-.,CTl--- ES 414D-14AES WTH A FA, - i -:,F THOSE P'E,'PLE :TAY PI,HT HERE 94 MONTI,: ELLC' -E-f:H TE.-t,i'v-,-ITH.A.PP---,Yl1..IATELY I PLAYERS -DN IT WILL LE.= IE THE .--IT Y P P W c� I I, -I'- I E L .4 1 TIM E": It .1 A 5 E AS01 4 345 11 T E 'M *: E A L 5 4 2 2 S .-D) L I L E A. V E THE :IT'.' IT ER TOGOT--i c -T C1.01.1D. ELI, FIVE R, PRINCET--I,1A141-1.YH ERE EVER ELSE E I'bA L A E. I E -rhv b, 2COD11 0 NEW FACES MYNA /'1C,1JFIM L L 01 /TH HO KEY` .A S 0C/A RON 9ENEF/TS WE FEEL THAT ANY T'•,•'PE OF STRUCTUP.E WILL BENEFIT THE ENTIRE C01111UNITY WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE CITY, SCHOOL, AND THE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION. 05VIOUSLY DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRUCTURES WILL HAVE DIFFERENT BENEFITS. WE FEEL THAT A TEMPOPARY STRUCTURE WILL 5ASICALLY SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION AND THE SCHOOL HOCKEY TEAM AND WILL ALSO FULLFILL SOME RECREATIONAL NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. IF WE WERE TO MOVE INTO SOME SORT OF BUILDING THE 5ENEFITS EXPAND AND A VARIETY OF ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS BECOME POS.'_IBLE. WE WOULD LIKE TO 5P.EAK DOWN THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND THE FACILITY EENEFITE AS WE SEE THEM TO EACH GPOUP WHILE KEEPING IN MIND THAT ONLY ONE'S IMAGINATION LIMITS THE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT A FACILITY LIKE THIS COULD EE USED FOR. EC^NOMIC EENEFITS • rl Y -IT HAS BEEN ESTIMATED THAT A HOCKEY FACILITY WILL BRING ABOUT 15 TO 20.000 PEOPLE INTO THE COMMUNITY BESIDES KEEPING THE PEOPLE IN THE MONTICELLO DISTRICT IN TOWN.(SEE CHART) WHILE THESE PEOPLE APE VISITING THEY MAY DO SOME SHOPPING OP DUPING TOUPNAMENTS THEY WILL STAY IN OUR MOTELS AND EAT AT OUR PESTAURANTS. EVENTUALLY A BUILDING FACILITY COULD HELP SUPPORT OTHER RECREATIONAL NEEDS SUCH AS AN AOUATIC CENTER. • S.0 -THE SCHOOL IS PRESENTLY HAVING TO BUS THE HIGH SCHOOL TEAM TO DELANO EACH DAY AND THIS IS VERY EXPENSIVE. THIS COST COULD BE ELIMINATED. THE SCHOOL WOULD HAVE A RECREATIONAL CACILITY AT A MINIMAL COST TO THE DISTRICT. 9 HOCKEY AS50CIATIQN-WE CUPRENTY TRAVEL TO FOUP DIFFERENT ARENAS FOR PRACTICE IST CLOUD STATE, ELK FIVER, SAUK. PAPIDS, PRINCETON). %.41TH AN APENA THIS WOULD BE ELIMINATED. INSTEAD OF SPENDING OUP. !CE AND GAS MONEY AND SOME OF OUP SHOPPING MONEY IN THESE COMMUNITIES THPnLIGHOIJT THE WINTEo MONTHS WE COULD EE SPENDING IT IN 110iJiCELLO. NYH,I; • COMMUNITY BUBBLE -OPEN SKATE. BROOMBALL LEAGUES, ADULT HOCKEY, FIGURE SKATING BUILDING -OPEN SKATE, BPOOMBALL LEAGUES. ADULT HOCKEY, FIGURE SKATING• HIGH SCHOOL HOCKEY GAMES, INDOOR TENNIS. WALKING FOR SENIORS• EXPOS. CRAFT SHOWS, CONVENTIONS, P.OLLEPBLADING, GOLF, SOFTBALL, BASEBALL, ARCHER", BASKETBALL • SCHOOL BUBBLE -HOCKEY SCHOOL PRACTICE (GAMES-?), TEACHING STATION DUPING WINTER MONTHS BUILDING -HIGH SCHOOL PRACTICE, HIGH SCHOOLGAMES, RECREATIONAL FACILITY IN THE FALL AND THE SPRING, TEACHING STATION DUPING THE DAY, COMMUNITY ED FUNCTIONS • HOCKEY ASSOC IATION-PPACTICES IN MONTICELLO, GAMES IN MONTICELLO. HOST TOUPNAMENTS IN MONTI IN EITHEPTYPE OF FACILITY Council Agenda - 1/25/93 7. Consideration of ltrantin¢ a non -intoxicating melt liquor license••Little M[ountein Billiards. 18.14.1 A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Little Mountain Billiards, operated by Bruce and .Judy Langford on South Highway 25, has applied for a :3.2 hoer (non-intuxicatingl on -sale license. Al first glance, one would normally assume that it pool hall or billiard room would qualify for it :3.2 beer un -sale license. Upon further examination, our ordinances relating to on -sale beer licenses indicate that the City shall grant it license only to bona fide clubs, beer stores (taverns), restaurants, and hotels where Food is prepared and served for consumption on the premises. lit reviewing Minnesota State Statutes, Section 340A.41 1, restricts on -sale non - intoxicating :3.2 malt liquor licenses to only drug stores, restaurants, hotels, clubs, howling centers, and establishments used exclusively for the sale of 3.27 malt, liquor with the incidental sale of tobacco and soft drinks. It appears from Ole stalIII vs, 1.110 Cil.y would have to issue a license under the classification of this business qualifying as a restaurant or if beer tavern, not as a hilliard room . In discussing this application with our City Attorney, he did note that cities art- responsible for issuing :3.2 licenses and du not need tip he approved by the Slate Liquor Control Division, Mr. Weingardeo did caution that the City should nal, violate slate statutes intentionally and must classify the business receiving the license as a restaurant or a har to meet slate statutes. State statutes also allow municipalities to establish their own criteria as far as sealing capacity is concerned when determining what qualifies as a restaurant. In other words, the Council could determine that tiny establishment serving any type of rood with seating capacity fin• F people qualifies as if restaurant and, thus, you would he allowed to issue if :3.2 license. The main reason for ;approving it license under (tile of the conditions such as it restaurant is to protect I,he City from tiny potential liability from someone claiming the City illegally issued it license to the billiard establishment. As an udditional note, I did contact the Liquor Control Division, and their first response was that. Ihey do not regulate 3.2 licenses; it is up to local cities tip du so. When questioned concerning the limitations established in the strafe law, Ihey seemed surprised that it pool hall would not be eligible and indicated that most, communities probably can utilize if liberal determination fur granting:3.2 licenses In such establishments. It should he noted that as far its intoxicating on -sale liquor is concerned, the City classifies it restaurant as an establishment Council Agenda - 1/25/93 serving meals to the general public with seating capacity for at least 30 people. The City is not required to have the same definition for a restaurant for :3.2 licenses, and you are free to establish any definition you wish. In discussing the license request with Mr. Bruce Langford, i t appears the Little Mountain Billiards only has a couple of tables available for seating, with most patrons ordering food such as hot dogs and bratwurst and eating them by utilizing it counter next to the wall. In addition, when this establishment was first opened, Mr. Langford noted that the billiard establishment would be catering quite extensively to juveniles, and the question may arise as to how much of their business is from individuals under 21 years of age, the legal drinking age. The Council could determine that this establishment is not qualified as a restaurant and, therefore, not eligible for an on -sale beer license, especially in light of the amount of juveniles that patronize the establishment. If the Council would require a larger seating capacity for consideration as a restaurant to qualify for the beer license, this could affect the parking requirements associated with this business. In the past, there was very little seating available for the customers, and the parking relluirements- are based strictly en the billiard atmosphere. If more seating is available and is required, possibly the parking would not he sufficient for this business. It. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Council could determine that this business qualifies for issuance of it 11011 -intoxicating on -sale license based on the City's definition of a restaurant.. Any approval hosed on this assumption should so indicate in Lite minutes to protect the City from potential liability of issuing it license illegally. 2. Council could determine Chat the billiard establishmentduesnotqualify under our present ordinance or under state statutes and, thus, is not eligible for nn on -sale license. (.. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Currently, the City has only issued :1.2 beer licenses to the Pizza Factory and Lhc Monticello Country Club. In bath cases, I helieve iCs reasonable to assume they ore considered restaurants or have this capability and proper seating. As noted by the City Attorney, an issuance of it license should he so stilted under one of the conditions allowed such as it restaurant. Council may wish to add Council Agenda - 1/25/93 a definition to our ordinance describing what is considered a restaurant as far as seatiuK capacity is cuacerued. WItliuut such a defiiiitiun, it is cunceivable that any business that sells a hot dog may also request an on -sale beer license and apply under the restaurant provision. Currently, convenience stores such as Tom Thumb, Total Mart, and perhaps others have a seating capacity at their snack bars that exceed the "restaurant' service provided at the billiard establishment. Therefore, granting a license to the billiard establishment based on the premise that it is a restaurant would appear to open the door to similar requests by others. Frum my own concern, I question the wisdom of issuing an on -sale beer license to an establishment that was or is primarily patronized by juveniles. It's possible that the owners are trying to attract an older clientele by having on - sale beer available, but an establishment that caters primarily to juveniles would not seem appropriate for an on -sale beer license. At the same time, howling alleys are allowed by statute to have on -sale licenses, and they also cater to juveniles and families. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of application. Council Agenda - 1/25/93 e. Resort on 1992 Senior Citizen Center activities. (J.OJ REFERENCE. AND BACKGROUND: Pam Loidolt, Senior Center Director, will be providing a report on 1992 activities. Attached is a report that she will be reviewing with you. This is an update only. ui MONTICELLu SENIOR CENTER 1992 STATISTICS Duplicated Duplicated Participants Participants (organized 8 Phone Activities Unduplicated (organized unorganized Volunteer Calls Offered __ .__ _________ParticiQants____ activities) __ activities) ___Hours_________ Received _________(Unduelicated)_ 1st Quarter 480 2,009 3,319 1,106.5 417 29 2nd Quarter 456 2,572 3.972 1,391.5 701 29 3rd Quarter 504 3,199 4,400 1,461.5 728 37 4th Quarter 501 2,852 3,707 1,118.5 686 37 TOTAL 960 10,632 15,398 5,078 2,532 70 Activities ot't'ered include: free legal aid, free tax assistance, free blood pressure checks, trips, cards, walking group, pool, tournaments (cards and pool), ceramics, Birthday/Anniversary Dinners, Hobby Day, free rinancial seminar, dances, Senior Spelling Bee, 55 Alive defensive driving, Volunteer Appreciation, Hawaiian party, Older American's Month events, exercise class, lino dancing, Dinner Club, Movie Matinee, Pie 6 Iee Cream Social, Living Will seminar, Grandparent/child Day events, Nuraing Home Card Club, hearing aid servicing, bingo, puzzles, 25th Anniversary Celebration, memory loss and stress management seminars, craft classes, t'lu shots and other special events. Council Agenda - 1/25/9:3 9. Consideration of storm water study for the Meadow Oak pond outlet M.S.) A. RE EUNCE AND BACKGROUND OSM has completed the storm water study for an outlet to the Meadow Oak pond, which was ordered some time ago. A copy is included with the agenda supplement under separate cover. An outlet currently exists from the Meadow Oak pond to the south side of I-94. This was plugged on each end with concrete immediately atter its construction due to the Township and County's concern with additional discharge in ditch 33. The culverts are already in place under 1-94; consequently, the study involves getting water from the north end of the 1-94 culverts to the Mississippi River. The enclosed study hooked at three separate alternates, all of which include an open ditch across the Gene Bauer property. Consequently, storm sewer piping would start at the 90 degree corner on Gillard at the southeast corner of the Sandherg Fast, plat. Alternative "A" runs right down the center of the existing Gillard Street and would require the entire street replacement. The cost of this alternative is $328,400 mainly due to the road replacement cost of approximately $38,000. If this proiect were timed to coincide with the need for street replacement (which will he needed in the not-toordistanl future), it could he a viable alternative, its the 'township may pay for 5W of the street costs. Alternate "It" places the storm sewer pipe through the heavily wooded Norell property lit it cost of $253,600. This appears to he it very viahle alternative hot is totally dependent on Norell and his development of his property. More than likely, the City would have to know the proposed location of streets within his development so that the storm sewer could he located appropriately. In addition, if Mr. Norell were not ready to develop at the time the storm sewer went in, we would probably he negotiating a long-term deferral and/or of cost. The cost of this alternative is $253,W0. Alleronte "t;" includes running down the east ditch of Cillard fully in township property all t,hu wily to the river. This would require replacement of a portion of Gillurd where the deepest storm sewer is bitted and the replacement of some driveways. The estimate for this ulternnte is $238,000. It does not, however, include moving the power )toles which are located in this ditch. Since this utility improvement would Iw limited outside the city, we would have to pay For the cost of relmaling these power poles either on a temporary or tN:ruuoneul, basis. During I,he final review of the CISM report, City staff noted that there may also 12 Council Agenda - 1/26/93 he a possible fourth alternate which was not addressed in the study. This Alternate "D" is it modification of Alternate "A" (which runs down the center of Gillard to the north side of the Herbst residence and heads cast). Alternate "D" would not turn east at the Herbst property but continue down Gillard to the river. The estimated cost of the Alternate "D" is $289,906. Alternate "B" is probably our preferred route through Norell's property. If he is uncooperative, Alternate "D" or "C" may be more cost effective than "A", but they would require Township approval and result in less benefitting arca than "A" or AV. The Township may be willing to pay for a portion of road improvements to Gillard. 13. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative is to accept the storm water study and direct staff to discuss the study's alternatives with the Township, Rod Norell, Gene Bauer, and MN/DOT so that the Council will have additional information prior to selecting an alternative. 2. The second alternative would he merely to accept the stonn water study tit this timo and lake no further action or do no further investigation. 3. The third alternative would Ire to accept the storm water study and authorize the City Engineer to perform additional work to determine the proposed assessment for the henefatting properties for the best two or three alternatives. This information could then he used in discussions with the henefatt.ing property owners when selecting an alternative. C. STAFF RECl1NIMENDATION II is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City Council look at. approving alternatives ill or A3. Questions concerning propoused assessment cost. may come up when discussing alternatives with benefitting properties. IL may he hest to have this infornuat.ion prior to those discussions. In that case, alternative #3 appears to be more advisable. 'there is no need to rush into it design at this particular time because the pond outlet should not Ix needed until the Briar Oakes second phase is well underway. This could change if extremely wet weather cycles occurred which caused the ponds in Briar (-)likes and Meadow Oak to overflow their hanks. Il. SUP14 )UTING DATA: See storm water study enclosed under separate cover. 13 MEADOW OAKS OUTLET - ALTERNATE D Prepared by City of Monticello UNIT DESCRIPTION 9 UNIT PRI - T TA 18' RCP Apron 1 Each 5600.00 $600.00 30' RCP Apron 2 Each $1,050.00 $2,100.00 18' RCP - CL 3 100 Lin Ft $23.50 $2,350.00 24' RCP - CL 3 170 Lin Ft $31.00 $5,270.00 24' RCP - CL 4 170 Lin Ft $36.00 $6,120.00 30' RCP - CL 3 434 Lin FI $39.00 $16,926.00 30' RCP - CL 4 510 Lin Ft $47.00 $23,970.00 30' RCP - CL 5 600 Lin Ft $67.00 $40,200.00 30' RCP - CL 4000d 400 Lin Ft $72.00 $28,800.00 36' RCP - Jacking 80 Lin Ft $250.00 $20,000.00 4' Diameter Manhole (0-8) 9 Each $1,050.00 $9,450.00 6' Diameter Manhole (0-8) 1 Each $2,000.00 $2,000.00 4' Diameter Extra Depth 60 Lin Ft $100.00 $6,000.00 CL. III Riprap 25 Cu Yds $50.00 $1,250.00 Seed Mix #500 with 4' Topsoil, Fertilizer and Mulch 5 Acre $800.00 54,000.00 EroslonControl 400 Lin Ft $2.50 $1,000.00 Ditch Excavation 2500 Cu Yds $3.00 $7,600.00 Bituminous Removal 5250 Sq Yds $1.00 $5,250.00 Subgrado Preparation 19.5 R.S. $100.00 $1,950.00 AggrogatoBase Cl. 5 2325 Tons $5.00 $11,625.00 Typo 41 Weer Course 465 Ton $21.00 $9,765.00 Type 31 Base Cour so 485 Ton $19.00 $9,215.00 Bituminous Materrnl for Tack Coat 290 Gal $1.25 $362.50 Total Estimated 1993 Construction Cost $215,703.50 5% Contingencies $10.785.18 Subtotal $226,488.68 .28% Indirect $63,416.83 TOTAL PROJECT COST `$289,905.61 Prepared by City of Monticello (_pTs\SISSIpp, RIVER F.E NO Rpp105 L • DAI?LF Ft GILLARD RD. C, 3 + t5 t 1 - +---` — — -- — — x 4 S DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDRY �p�• 0 ALTE INATE _ I o Sar ? w�. ♦2 0 YC j F. E. . ]�FgOo 9LQAV PROPOSE) DITCH• S s.04, fir EXIST. CUL /ERTB C.?• _ ���i':r�-r'. _�• �• II BULKNEADEO $TOR- IEWER OUTLII Drown By Drawing Lille .'mm N0, R.G.D. Se�,elen DRA I NAGE AREA I'.8 q} - �, 4eyeron tr Dola ""OQ1e'Q•'nO MEADOW OAKSI h _ �.,�.........Y��.c�.......,.....�...... _ gel no. I. ....... Ybu.MKY. N.0 ep.l°Yp MONT ! CELLO- MN Council Agenda - 1/25/93 to. Consideration of an ordinance amendment declaring all Citv-owned buildinHs and vehicles "smoke free:' W.S.1 REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: If you listen to the radio, watch t.v., or read a newspaper, you cant help but note something about the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes, pipes, and cigars on the individual using such products and the individuals around smokers. For years, the Surgeon General has been warning us about smoking by requiring labels on the various products. Smoke ads have been prohibited from television, and more and more evidence is coming in about the harmful effects of smoke. The American Lung Association and the American Heart Association have taken to position on the hazards of smoke and second-hand smoke, and the effects of smoke and nicotine are perceived harmful to many other organs in the body and have been the direct or indirect cause of many painful deaths. The City's insurance company has recognized the harmful effects of smoking and is now paying for the use of slop smoking aids such as the Habitrol patch. Tbce City should also encourage the use of smoke cessation programs and suPlwrt employees wishing to quit smoking. We must also do what we can to provide a clean air environment for all employees and visitors. The City of Monticello s Health Oflieer, Dr. Donald Maus, supports the idea of a sntoke- free environment. The School District and the Monticello -Big Lake Hospital and Nursing Home have declared their buildings smoke free. Cities are starting tat realize the effects of second-hand smoke on their workers. Even the City of St. Paul passed to resolution effective November 1, 1992, making the laity of tit. Paul public buildings smoke free. Mr. Allen Terwedo, Director of the Smoking and Health Education Programs with the American Lung Association of Minnesota, applauded the action of the City of St. Paul in It recent article in the November 1992 issue of The Minnesota Cities Mataar.ine. I don't think there is it single person on the Council or City staff that cam say that smoking or second-hand smoke has not or will not affect the lives of their family, friends, and relatives in it negative way. I think it's time the City of Monticello) declared till of the buildings it owns and its vehicles free of tobacco smoke by hanning smoking in those places. There tare also fire and safety concerns for those smoking in buildings or while driving city vehicles. Will it ineonvenience some markers working for Che City of Monticello or occupying or visiting those buildings on it temporary hasis? Sure it will. Two people_ in the public works department tare regular smokers, one tat the liquor store, one tat the public library, a couple of I:tiG workers tat the wastewater 14 Council Agenda - 1/25/93 treatment plant, and five or six out of the 200 regular members of the Senior Citizen Center smoke. Additionally, several firemen are regular smokers. The last regular smoker at city hall quit smoking late last year, and the employees in that work place are breathing easier. It doesn't work to separate smokers in a separate area without providing a totally separate, enclosed heating and ventilation system for that purpose. I've probably gone on too long already on this subject, as I believe most of you already know this subject matter quite well. I have, however, enclosed some additional data for your review. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative is to pass an ordinance amendment declaring all City -owned buildings and vehicles free of tobacco smoke by prohibiting smoking. 2. The second alternative is not to prohibit smoking in City -owned buildings and vehicles. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City pass the enclosed ordinance amendment (modeled atter the City of Duluth ordinance) as outlined in alternative #I prohibiting smoking in City -owned buildings and vehicles. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of ordinance amendment; Information on effects of smoking; Letter from the City Health Officer. 15 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, NILN—N-ESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS THAT TITLE 7 OF THE MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER PERTAINING TO A SMOKE FREE ENVIRONMENT: CHAPTER 9 SMOKE FREE ENVIRONMENT SECTION: 7-9-1: Purpose 7-9-2: Policy 7-9-3: Exceptions 7-9-4: Smoke Cessation Programs 7-9-5: Enforcement Provisions 7.9-1: PURPOSE: The City Administration is committed to promoting a safe and healthy environment for its employees and citizens who use City - owned buildings. It is our intention to provide an environment that is free from the effects of tobacco smoke and its associated health risks. 7-9-2: POLICY: Effective March 1, 1993, smoking and the carrying of lighted smoking materials in City -owned buildings or vehicles is forbidden. 7-9-3: EXCEIMONS: (A) City -owned buildings under lease or rent, which agreements do not give the City the authority to enforce a smoking prohibition. In those instances, the renter or leasee shall be asked to voluntarily comply until the end of the currentlease or rental agreement. All future leases or remail agreements shall prohihit smoking. 7.9-4: SMOKE CESSATION PROGRAMS: The City will provide employees who wish to qu it smoking support in doing so. 7.9-5: ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS: Ordinance Amendment No. Page 2 (Ai Enialovees. Disciplinary action in accordance with the applicable labor contract and Civil Service Rules, and/or in appropriate cases, criminal prosecution under M.S.A. 144.414. (B) Citizens. Employees observing citizens in violation of the smoke free policy should: 1. Advise the citizen that the building is smoke free 2. If the citizen does not extinguish the smoking materials, the employee should make a direct request of the citizen to do so. 3. If the request is denied, the employee should direct the citizen to leave the building. 4. Should noncompliance result, the employee should contact local law enforcement personnel, in accordance with M.S.A. 144.414. Based on the circumstances, police intervention may result in (a) issuance of a summons, or (b) issuance of a warning letter through the City Attorney's office. Adopted this 25th day of January, 1993. Mayor City Administrator Ci0 SMOKING IN THE WORKPLACE Hew do latus regarding smoking allect employers? By GEORGE D. WEBSTER MOKIe'f. 11 yEa1' HUGH IN THE News today, with almou every day bring- ing word of another city or state ,list has enacted legislation restricting ■masking in the workplan. (See -Smok- ing Policies in Associations; Clearing the Air?" on page 60.1 In the context of employment law, the three key clues. tions regarding smoking are thee: 1. Ila) an employer refuse to hire smolen? 4. hlay an employer require current employees who do invoke to quit amok• in as a condition of leaping ihe)r'obs? S. Dora the employer have an oblige. tion to protide a smoke-free environ. ment to nonsmokers? If w, what 4 the emp In)er'r liability for failing to do to? &I fnnunueh, there are no firm, set- tled amwer► to thete questions. Won respect to the first two questions, d• though no lawfor bids discrimination on the basis of smoking, laws do txist that forbid discrimination on the basis of handicap. Thus, if an emplopte can persuade the Equal Employment OP- pnrtunity Commisvion (EEOC) or a aatr human -relations commission that amokinµ is a handicap, he or she may sate a claim agaimi the employer under Iswa forbidding discriminatlon on the basis of handicap, if the employer re- fuses to hire or 3hmlstes the employee side.on, on the basis that he or she is a arnnkrr. To date, however,no !tura hate been reporud that hold shat amok- ingg is a ban icap. 1'hr fact that the Surgeon General of ,he United Stares hat stated that amok- ing is an addiction akin to drug or alcohol addiction me) acwa0) strength- en a smokers hand p-diacriminsiion argument. Cases halt held that both drug and alcohol addiction are handl. cap% and that employers may not auto. maticatly refuse to hire or dlsmlsi em- pinyrra wlih drug or alcohol problems. The tae is well -+titled that an employ- er may forbid smoking on company pprrmi eses and dunng working hours; indeed, the employer must do ►o If a local or state law bans smoking in the workplace. But whether an emplo,er tris' (orhid an emplov'ee to smoke a6 getiIer, even when oft' thejob. h far less certain and ,herefort far riskier from a legal point of view. As a general proposition, an employ- er me) not regulate the off -dui con. duct of employees unless the employer can show that the off-dmy conduct af- fected the emplo)ee's performance on the job or anme)row' Prejudiced ,he em- plo)ers reputation. Under this rule. It may be possible for organisations tach u the American Hears Assoclation, the American Cancer Soder). and similar groups to hate rules that forbid emPLO) - ees to smoke at a11. either on or off duty. With respect to the third question, the poWbiht• exists that nonsmoking em ployees ma' bring actions against their employers �or permitdnQ rmo►ing if the tmplo)ru an prove that the) were phyaiolI harmed by the smoke. In a ,,h",, rases, employees have sued on the theory that the employer intentionally "used them emotional distress by not providing them with a smote -free envb ronmeni. It b also possible that an employee mlpht seek to recover workers compen- rauon benefits, on the theory that smok. ing in the workplace caused Injury or disease, or aggravated an tsiuJng igjur) or dbrote F�+iployees might also tom. pplIant to the Occupational !Safety and Health Adrninittradon (OSHA), alleg. ing chat by permitting smoking the em- pployyrr it breaching Its duty under OSHA to provide a Life workplue. ramm set r.ra In virus of the currrn, state of the law, the best rules for association to follow j are there: 1. Do not have a blanket policy or practite, whether expressed or followed silently or secred), of not biting or of , gettingg nd of people who smoke. 7.Obe) the laws restricting or forbid- ding smoking. S. You era)' have a policy, even if not mandated b) law, forbidding smoking I at any time and at any place an employ- . ce Is working (the beat baso for such a i policy h health or safety considerations). t. Do not attempt to discipline em- plo)m far smoking off duty. S. Whenever a no -smoking ppoolicy la Instituted, particularl) if it Is to be abso- lute (no smoking anyuhrie, anytime). '. offer employee% who smoke the oppor- ; wnit)—and mri.uncr to quit before disciplining them for continuing to smoke on the job, fl. Slake an effort to accommodate the requests or demands of nonsmokers for a rmoke•free working emlronment; In an) ase, never ridicule, eritidae, harass, Intimidate. or retaliate against non. amoken, 7. On the other hand, make an effort, If possible, to accommodate smokers bl' providmr them with places or times whet@ and when they may smoke. There are a few reported cases involy. ing smoking, all of which Involvepu hist employees. In one ase. Cnuendorf V. Okkhmm Ch), the Tenth Circuit af. firmed dw dhmisul of s firefighter who and three puffs of a cigarette at lunch In violation of a rule forbidding amok. In on or off duty for one year after bean hired. Several points should be nole� about this d"Won, however. tint, the employee signed an empliorp mens agreament that at a precondition of employment he would not smoke a cigarette, either on or off duty, for a period of one year from the rime he favors. teal • �i50t+*4+ wsnaGlhtxn W I h-. las h.,,l .,.1, ,��„ ,�. •. �,,,,uJ, Ihr ua•11 mn.J III.,. ....... 1 h�Inr1 .. I Iw,l,•Ihr � �I,annl Iln.d .� ' Lnnnl.11 lol.,u„n rv•nuf Ls�rorrn llu�n,,. uunliu� 11dv and Ih, hr.dlh .uul ..II, n �! hm11);h1 o1 •. l'•,,,d hrehh .Ind ),11,•1. ,al unuiiunulin; .tic c.,c•ui,nl n•yunn� mrnn Im hrciiph,,,•. 11tr n,nul tank. I l•h., I'rlali„u.hip. It.... r,c,. ,.. 'A'. ' -rd. Ihr ,iur1 •.rn1 .m i„ m,rr, b, '1” Inn,! nn,u ,d d„� ,ulr, yl,l d,cutiun to li rlry•Ll, I n.uu,, ..0„I n„.... true )'ear .Ihr1 I•In .� ,nun L,�n n,l pl.0 In.nl intrrenees ma). lin.n,n u,.nn n,,, c. • Ih:n are Peru. nrnl I�, pll,.n,-�,Ia, nnpLl,'ert. such .,. ,Iado .nv.,,.L,J u.. I'll It. or course, un, l n,hnvmuking should be a.nrd eirm-1, used Imantunieated to all un lens rulplrn rr, us ,.ell at tojob aP- phrnnte. 11 Ihr n.l,ri.niun rurrendy has nu pow, nn tm„Linp but Tithes to until,- anr, it th—ld gi,e advance /`� t 1 m/ Inute► from dowrno'a•n; grant dm. mg and shoppping. and. e1 course. the unce•in a Itfettme scenery of the .o'ld's mfarm hesutifu) horse fars ss Selecting l.eatnon as your neat p: ...and Lexington is so affordable! ' meeung or convention Or puts )roti "There't something else about in the wry best comp ni. Les;ington, coo—the lanusue sup• Like that of the National Asu<1• on of Iwai members. NAHD's Ue,olmon Ilion of Hume Duilders tNAHDr. members gra all out to which has chosen I.exinpon for not make sure their city males a great one, but three major matting& tetprefuon" `Levingron has great faaht,es," Sun b) calling one of your con. , , explained NAH8 &telt vice prosi- tarts in Letinzon,orour ales dent Wayne Stetson. "A fully office, and you'll find out wh) the ., act tripped 80.00 square loot con best are holding their meatings In 'Intron center, 6A00 hotel rnoms "Americas Best o1 Show-- •• to sail every taste, an airport just Lexington, Kentucky. •. Greater Len wyrvl Ct+nYarie•r sad V131rors VYnav 430 tl'ut Vine. Suite 3(3 • Larmptm,. K)'40507 • (606)2.43•!221 114 1 1 1 . . . MUM �I notice and provide an adjustmentr transition period. h Secot,d, units, the associationoil show ■ definite link between its smokingn Policy and emplu)ee or public healely' and safety it should not attempt -ca - promulgate or enforce a rule that fol:” bids smoking by employees alio�e i, both in and out of the office. �y the; same token, If the association tan enab:: fah such a rule, Crtuendtrf auggesu that the association not undermine iia own rationale by limiting the rule to a certain • chss of em lo)'ets only--e.g., proba•j - Lion- employees—or to a certain dote„ period only—c.g., one y'car after being - hired. Another case, Canoll v. Tenmestet Val.. (ti Authority, also invokes a public sector employer. An employee claimed that ha supervisor ignored her requests for a smoke•free work environment, ig- nored mandatory TVA policy to ensure a smoke-free workplace, told her co- workers about her smokt wmplaints, reuuated against her by giving her poor Performance ratings, and verhall)' ha- rassed her In front of her co-workers. ; The federal court in the Disuin of I Columbia held that thr emplovet had sated a good cause of action for inten- tional Miction of emotional dituess and therefore refuted to dism u thin croute of the employee's suit. No sus exist that hold that discrimi• nation against smokers violates either i Or federal civil rights an t7ide VII of 1 the Cavil Rights Act of 1964). the Reha- hiliution Act of 1973 (prohibiting ; handicap discrimination by government contractors), or state fair -employment practice Laws. If, however, an association were to permit male em layers to m soke but not recall employees, this would constitute a vlolauon. Another type of suit that is at lust conceivable under the disparate impact theory of Title VI I Is this: Supppoose the association had a rule that smoWng was permitted in private offset but not In shared or partitioned work spaces; sup• pose further that only eaecutiveJeval aPlo eel had private offices and that vintully all such employees were trine and white. In that case, female or black employers might allege that the associe Lion's smoking policy had I disparate Impact on them because In practice, only the female or black employees were forbidden from smoking on theJob.m G'7 A. W4110 it `neral control is AS ow/ a portae. in N'cRun. Chamber. bis U Brae. a W"AmItan. D.C., bw fires. He u At author qr The LAw of Assesda. dons, awilab4 from ASAI Publsmrioms. D SUBJELT: SECTION: SMOKE TREE ENVIROHMEHT CP -S 111 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION DEPARTMENT OT ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT D.U.I.-C-1 „ EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1989 POLICY/PROCEDURE SUPERCEDES: May 30, 1986 PAGE 1 OF 1: APPROVED BY: City Administratio: CP -S 112 SMOKE FREE ENVIRONMENT Purpose: The City Administration is committed to promoting a safe and healthy environment for its employees and citizens who use City -owned buildings. It to our intention to provide an environment that is free from the effects of tobacco smoke and its associated health risks. policy: Effective July 1, 1969, smoking and the carrying of lighted smoking materials in City -owed buildings or vehicles is forbidden. Exceptions: 1. Residential caretakers while within the confines of their full-time residence. 2. City -owned buildings under lease or contract agreements with group or individuals, such as community clubs. Smoke Cessation Programs: The City will provide employees who wish to quit smoking support in doing no. Enforcement Provisions!' Employees - Disciplinary action in accordance with the applicable labor contract and Civil Service Rules, and/or in appropriate cases, criminal prosecution under M.S.A. 144.414. Citizens - Employeas observing citizens to violation of the smoke free policy should: 1) Advise the citizen that the building is smoke-free. 2) if the citizen does slot extinguish the smoking materials the employee should make a direct request of the citizen to do so. k) If the request is denied the employee should direct the citizen to leave the building. 4) Should noncompliance result the employee should contact local law soforcement personnel, in accordance with M.S.A. 144.414. Based on the circumstances, police intervention may result in (s) issuance of a summons, or (b) issuance of 6 warning latter through the City Attorney's Office. Jen. 21 '93 11:331 4 E P I -_AII LLQ IG ray91g FAi; 2275.159 F. 1 'o: ALA OF MU@16OTA from: ANYAICA11 LUNG ASSOCIATION ii -93 7:90pe p,/ Coalition ori Smoking OR Health For Release Cnntert: ta. Iransrmllnl ni�r76 Tl+ol c.w•• AMs, Thursday, January 7, 1993 Joe I �ros1.11'bianJ 1 �Joi�r S•w.a.> /�7..b � h1 .J o.Pi. I''f'- a FS yyUy a.. 2�� -seri HEALTH GROUPS CALL ON PRESIDENT BUSH F TO BAN SMOKING IN FEDERAL BUILDINGS Washington, D.C., Jan. 7 -- Following release today of the Environmental Protection Agency's report on the health risks of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, the American Lung Association, American Heart Association and American Cancer Society, united as the Coalition on Smoking OR Health, called on President Bush to conclude his White House years on a healthful note by prohibiting smoking in all federal buildings. On January 25, 1991, Health and Human Services Secretary Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., formally asked President Bush to sign en Executive Order prohibiting smoking in most federal buildings. (It would not apply to Congress, the Supreme Court or the Department of Defense.] Under existing rules, federal agencies are ermitted to set their own individual smoking policies. Sullivan -aid the order wouldprotect workers, persons doing business with the government and public visitors from the "dangersof smoking." "It's been two years since Secretary Sullivan proposed making federal buildings smoke-free,' said Alfred Munzer, M.D., a Coalition spokesman andPresident-elect of the American Lung Association. 'The new EPA report adds greater weight to Sullivan's arg9ument. It's time for President Bush to do the right thing before ha leaves office. He can set an example for the rest of the nation by making federal buildings smoke free.' The Coalition called the now EPA document "a major milestone linking tobacco use with death and disease." "We expect the EPA report will send reverberations across the country, leading to state and local policies for smuke-Free schools, workplaces and public places,' said Kinzer. The EPA report, two years in the making concludes that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke CET S), can cause lung cancer in nonsmokers. ETS is a mixture of the smoke exhaled by smokers and the smoke that comes from the burning end of a cigarette, cigar or pipe. Exposure to ETS will cause an estimated 3,800 lung cancer deaths in 1993. The EPA report designates ETS as a Group A carcinogen, a rating used only for dangerous substances (such as asbestos) known to cause cancer in humans. The report also concludes that exposure to CIS increases the risk of serious lung disoeso during the first two years of o ild's life. C/6) Jan.2:1 '93 11:33 Gi•EFIC�dI Wt_, ASSW FNX 22"`x159 P. 2 to: ALA Of MINNESOTA from: AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION 1-1-93 7:00P. P.1 ban smok ing/page two "Chiidrer. -- especially babioa and very young child en --are particularly susceptible to the health effects of e.posire to ETS. Their lungs are smaller and suffer dispProportionately because they are still growing and developing,' explained Munzer. 'The mounting evidence clearly supports the need for tighter restrictions on smoking in public places.' he said. 'Yet even the most stringent current state and local lows fail to fully protect nonsmokers from the lethal hazards of ETS.' The Coalition on Smoking OR Health recommends that smoking be prohibited in all public places, including schools, child day care centers, workplaces, restaurants, hospitals, trains, sports arenas and shopping malls. ' The Coalition supports federal, state and local legislative and/or regulatory efforts to and last significently strengthen existing clean indoor air laws that include provisions to restrict smoking in public places. We also urge enactment of strict laws where there are currently none on the books," said Munzer. "Employers should take heed as the evidence indicting ETS mounts,' he warned. 'They should, of course, prohibit smoking in their workplaces to protect the health of their workers, but also to ppratec t themselves from possible future liability and to reduce ee14h insurance costs." He noted that one recurring, cost-cutting „home in the debate over health care reform is the need fur citizens to take more responsibility for their own health. 'Public officials -- like President Aush --can help create an environment that enables citizens to take that responsibility," said Munzer. 'Preventing disease is much less emotionally, physically and financially costly than trating it. Cl as the air of environmental tobacco amok:ewill improve the F�ealLh of our people and our health care system.' The Coalition on Smoking OR Health was formed in 19BZ by the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association and American Lung Association to more effectively inform federal legisl ators and other public officials about the health consequences of tobacco us:. The three health organizations represent more than six million volunteers throughout the United States. a a s EOITOR'S NOTE: Hot off the presoesl Beginning today, o new brochure, entitled "Reducing the Health Risks of Secondhand Smoke: What You Can Do at Home. Work and in Public Places,' is available to the public through their local American Lung Association (check your local telephone white pages for masher and location). The ALA brochure is the first of its kind to offer guidance for individuals concerned about exposure to --vironmental tobacco smoke. It was developed in collaboration .th the Notional Heart. Lung and Blood Institute, the Centers for Oi000se Control and Prevention, ■nd the National Cancer Institute. The brochure woo funded by a grant from DuPont. . INVOLUNTARY SMOKING Tobacco smoke represents the single most significant source of pollution in most indoor air environments, particularly office worksites. Tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals and occurs in two phases. gas and particulate. Since tobacco smoke is a complex mixture of particles and gases, filtering out all the toxic components is extremely difficult and costly. Scientists and physicians have long recognized smoking as the leading preventable cause of death and disability in the world. The toxins in tobacco smoke kill over 434.1100 people per year in the United States alone. Nonsmokers exposed to secondhand cigarette smoke inhale these same toxins which produce damage similar to that observed in smokers. Secondhand smoke causes many lung cancer deaths annually. The gas phase of secondhand smoke contains such poisons and irritants as carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, acrolein, ammonia, nitrogen oxides, benzene, pyridine, and hydrogen cyanide. It also contains at least 15 known or probable carcinogens. The particulate phase contains nicotine (the addictive drug iu tobacco and itself a potent poison) as well as manv known or probable carcinogens which have no safe level for human exposure. The gas phase and the particulate phase cannot be effectiv-ly removed by mechanical filters. electrostatic precipitators or ion generators. In 1986, the U.S. Surgeon General issued his first report devoted entirely to the effects of involuntary smoking. This report, based on an exhaustive review of several hundred scientific studies, reached three major conclusions: ■ Involuntary smoking is a cause of disease. including lung cancer, in healthy nonsmokers. • The children of parents who smoke, as compared with the children of nonsmoking parents, have an increased frequency of respiratory infections, increased respiratory symptoms and lower rates of increase in lung function as the lung matures. • The simple separation of smokers and nonsmokers within the same air space may reduce, but does not eliminate, the exposure of nonsmokers to environmental tobacco smoke. This final conclusion is especially significant because the tobacco companies often advocate changes in ventilation as a solution to the problem of secondhand cigarette smoke since this will have little impact on smoking behavior or on tobacco sales. Unfortunately, simple ventilation changes will not eliminate the problems associated with secondhand smoke. Since publication of the Surgeon General's report, several scientists have linked involuntary smoking with other forms of cancer and heart disease. Involuntary smoking has many nonfatal but important effects: breathing secondhand smoke makes the eyes and nose burn, and can cause headaches and nausea in nonsmokers. People also object to the smell. These irritants can have a major impact on employees' morale, productivity and sense of well-being. LEGAL BASIS FOR - A SMOKE-FREE WORKPLACE �} While many employers are creating smoke-free workplaces for health and morale reasons, avoiding liability for employee injuries sustained through involuntary smoking on the job is also a major motivator for employers to establish smoke-free workplaces. Based on the growing body of evidence linking involuntary smoking to serious illness, employers who fail to eliminate tobacco smoke from the work environment are becoming vulnerable to lawsuits brought by nonsmokers. The pending classification of secondhand smoke as a Group A (known human) carcinogen by the US. Environmental Protection Agency is creating a growing concern about liability among employers. Common law, which can be invoked in every state except t.nuisiana, requires employers to provide reasonably safe workplaces for their employees. Employers may be enjoined from allowing smoking in the workplace. In 1975, the landmark case.Shrmp os. Neu)JerseY Hell established the precedent that a seriously affected employee can seek an injunction to protect against the imminent danger of tobacco smoke in the ambient air. Douna Shimp won the right to a smoke-free workplace and established a basis for subsequent legal decisions favoring nonsmoking workers. Employers have Ix --en awarded unemployment compensation. disability payments and workers compensation as a result of injuries sustained through involuntary snxrking on the job. Several discrimination suits have been won by 14 employees who were judged to be handicapped as a result of their sensitivity to secondhand smoke. In contrast, suits brought by smokers arguing a right to smoke on the job have never been successful. Nicotine addiction does not quality as a handicap under the Rehabilitation Act and the courts have never supported anyone's right to impose a health risk on others. There is also an accelerating trend toward legislatively mandating protection against involuntary smoking. Virtually every state has laws regulating smoking in public places. Dozens of states and hundreds of municipalities have enacted restrictions on smoking in the workplace. Can an employer legally create a smoke-free workplace? Yes. The consensus of legal opinion is as follows: Except in the rare instances when a labor contract exists which includes language prohibiting restrictions on smoking, the employer is free to eliminate all smoking on company premises. Some employers circumvent the problem of smoking in the workplace by hiring only nonsmokers. Since smoking is not a naturally occurring characteristic and is not a right protected by the first amendment, there are no grounds for a constitutional challenge to this type of policy, as long as the policy is applied equitably. Prior to Initiating a snloke•free workplace, employers should seek appropriate legal counsel to assure compliance with all applicable laws and employment agreements. rte 10 REASONS WHY NONSNIMRS MAKE BETTER EMPLOYEES 1. Nonsmokers have less absenteeism. U.S. Public Health Service studies show that smokers are absent from work because of illness 30 percent more often than nonsmokers. 2. Nonsmokers have fewer illnesses. Smokers are particularly susceptible to viruses and bacteria. They catch the common cold lis times more often than nonsmokers. 3. Nonsmokers have fewer chronic diseases leading to early disability. Smoker's diseases, such as lung cancer, emphysema and coronary heart diseases, often turn workers into permanent invalids, necessitating early retirement and costly disability payments. 4. Nonsmokers have fewer accidents at work. Smoking often is a distraction and can lead to accidents. (Example: Hany car accidents occur because the driver was searching for, lighting or disposing of a cigarette and his attention was diverted.) S. Nonsmokers tend to be more productive. They don't take time out for smoking breaks, trips to the cigarette machine, nor do they fumble with matches, lighters and ashtrays. 6. Nonsmokers make a better impression with the public. Receptionists, salespeople, and executives present a better image if they don't smoke. They smell better, look better and don't risk offending nonsmokers. 7. Nonsmokers are less destructive of company property. Fire damage caused by smokers represents huge financial losses. A conservative estimate by the National Fire Protective Association is that 25 percent of all fires resulting in property losses are caused by smoking materials. In fires where lives are lost, more than SO percent aro smoking-related. Destruc- tion, such as cigarette burns in rugs, on desks, trash can fires and damaged merchandise adds up to plenty. 8. Nonsmokers do not offend fellow workers. Any nonsmoker who has had to work with smokers will tell you what it's like. 9. Nonsmokers are less subject to many occupationnl health hazards. When there already exists an industrinl condition, such as airborne contamin- ants, nonsmokers do not further endanger their health. 10. Nonsmokers can work nenr sensitive machinery. Smokers may foul instru- ments, making them inaccurate, or, at best, necessitate frequent cleaning. 00 TE MONTICF.I W OjMC a Fm uh Praetw Clair efNmtb Mrumdd Mrd rd Cnm-+• January 20, 1992 Monticello City Council City of Monticello 250 E. Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Smoke -Free Environment To Whom It May Concern: As City Health Officer, I recommend for your consideration that the city offices be designated as a smoke-free environment. S incerely, �Q9 � Donald Mauls, M.D. DJM: jms 1107 Hm Bomknid • Suim 100 • Momkck Mimmu 553624728 - (612)295.2921 • Mam 5784560 X100 Council Agenda - 1/25/93 t 1. Con-aideration of adding a new emplovee to the water and sewer collection departmenLv. IJ.S.i REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The water and sewer collection departments are managed under the direction of the Public Works Director by two full-time employees. One is Matt Theisen, who is our Water/Sewer Collection System Superintendent, and the other is Richard Cline, a Water/Sewer Collection System Operator. During the summer months, we have added one to two summertime employees, usually college students, to aid in the duties. This two -nun department was formed in 1981 when the construction of the new wastewater treatment plant began. The City's infrastructure centering around our water system and wastewater collection system has grown significantly since that time. In the water department, we have added two new wells, a pump house, an 800,000 gallon above -ground reservoir, and two backup sources for emergency water such as the natural gas-fired eng,'ne at well t12 and the emergency generator at pump house q3. Along with this, we have added several miles of water main, hundreds of services, and many hydrants and gale valves. This period also brought growth in the sewer collection department with additional lift stations and many miles of sewer main, including our interceptor line, along with several miles of sanitary sewer force main. The increase in use of the collection system has grown by almost 451h from 450,000 gallons it day to the current average usage of 650,000 gallons it day. Water usage has grown from 159,000,000 gallons per year in 1981 to 278,000,000 in 1992, a growth of almost 75r/e. Although other departments such as public works and the wastewater treatment plant contract, operator assist the water and sewer collection department on major undertakings or emergencies, the day-in/day-out duties are tough enough to keep up with let alone cluing special projects. Vacation time is often very inconvenient to schedule, and sick day can cause loss of half the work force in the department. Well-qualified summer workers are hard to find and are dilricult to keep on it seasonal basis. Additionally, the 67 -day rule now in effect. limits its front using temporary people with it specific jot) lite for longer than 67 days. This also prohibits us from rotating people into die slot after til days under the same job description. 16 Council Agenda - V25/93 We had proposed to bring this issue before the Council sometime in late February for an April 1 new employee start; however, we have recently learned that one of our public works employees will he off for at least two months due to a major surgery. Consequently, during this period of time, the water and sewer collection system operator may be providing some assistance to the public works department in the employee's absence. Consequently, we would like to get approval from the City Council to advertise for the additional position. We would also post the position so that existing employees in other departments may be considered for transfer such as was the last case. The starting pay for this individual would be $10.90 an hour. The current union contract spells out a period of 54 months before reaching the top rate, which is currently $13.63 per hour. The current budgets for the water and wastewater collection system reflect the addition of a full-time employee. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. The first alternative would be to authorize the advertisement for an additional position of Water/Wastewater Collection System Operator. 'l. The second alternative would be not to advertise for a new employee but continue as we are utilizing summertime employees as much as possible. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and the Water/Wastewater Collection System Superintendent that the City Council authorize advertisement for a new employee as outlined in alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of job description for the position. 17 Water/Sewer Collection Operator City of Monticello Title of Class: Water/Sewer Collection Operator Effective Date: November 15, 1991 DESCRIPTION OF WORK General Statement of Duties: Performs skilled maintenance operations work involving the water distribution and wastewater collection systems for the City; and performs related duties as required. Supervision Received: Works under the general and technical supervision of the Water/Sewer Collection Superintendent. None; may provide leadwork direction to summer employees. TYPICAL DITTIES PERFORMED The listed examples may not include all duties performed by all positions in this class. Duties may vary somewhat from position to position within a class. Inspects and monitors city wells; computes daily pumpage and sets reservoir and water tower pumping levels; takes draw downs and collects water samples. Monitors and adjusts chemical feed pumps; maintains fluoride, chlorine, and polyphosphate levels in City water system. Maintains and repairs fire hydrants including moving and painting hydrants, and preparing hydrants for winter. Performs general maintenance to tower and pump house buildings including painting, replacing floors, constructing walls, etc. Inspects and monitors lift stations; computes pumpage amounts and hours run. Performs maintenance on lift stations and pumps including inspection of floats, alarms and dialers, valves and seals; changes oil on pumps; cleans lift stations. Removes and changes pumps as needed; cleans and unplugs pumps. Installs and calibrates water meters on new and existing structures; cleans and repairs water meters; reads water meters; may performs water main connections. Inspects and locates water and sewer lines for digging or sewer connection permits; performs air tests on sewer lines and pressure tests on water lines. Maintains sewer lines including jetting and rodding of collection lines, injecting root killer into sewer lines to remove awls, and applying odor control chemicals. Schedules and performs minor maintenance on sewer cleaning equipment; repairs utility holes as needed. (continued on next page) Water/Sewer Collection Operator City of Monticello May operatc front-cnd loader and trucks w rcnovc snow: from City streets, mura"pa,' parking lots, and alleys during winter; may operate sander and apply salt to roadways, sidewalks, and municipal parking lots. Assists other departments as needed. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES Considerable knowledge of tools, methods, operations and materials used in water and wastewater operations. Working knowledge of the operation of a Class C water facility. Working knowledge of the occupational hazards and safety precautions necessary to perform manual and maintenance work with water and wastewater collection systems. Working knowledge of federal and state laws, municipal ordinances, and regulatory requirements for water facilities and collection systems. Considerable skill in the repair and maintenance of water and wastewater collection equipment and facilities. Considerable ability to perform heavy manual labor, sometimes under adverse weather conditions. Considerable ability to communicate effectively with other City employees, and the general public. Considerable ability to follow oral and written instructions and to work independently with minimal directions. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Must possess a Minnesota Class B driver's license and must obtain a Class C Water Certificate within one year of employment. Must have one year experience maintaining a Class C Water facility. Vocational or technical training in water systems and treatment can substitute for the required experience. �, i RRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 12:03:14 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLI 34?07 17/31/92 U.S. POSTMASTER 210 CORRECT COOING 110.40C91 34207 12/31/92 U.S. POSTMASTER 210 CORRECT CODING 110.40 0.00 •CME 34S22 12/31/92 O'NEILL/JEFF 161 MILEAGE EXPENSE 72.50 34522 12/31/92 O'NEILL/JEFF 161 MISC EXPENSE 84.17 156.57 *CHI 34523 12/31/9? MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES/MTC BLD 444.12 34524 1?/31/92 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 116 TITLED WATERCRAFT 30.00 34525 12/31/92 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 WATERCRAFT/A1V/S14OW 1.337.00 34526 12/31/92 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 TITLED WATERCRAFT 1?8.00 34527 17/31/92 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 586.00 34529 12/31/92 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL 3 PEST CONTROL/LIBRARY 46.86 34579 t 12/31/92 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLL .90173 SEMINAR/TEO FARNAM 210.00 34530 12/31/92 BEN FRANKLIN 20 SUPPLIES/PARKS DEPT 11.46 34530 17/31/92 BEN FRANKLIN ?0 SUPPLIES/PW EXPANSICNr 8.76 34530 12/31/92 8EN FRANKLIN 20 POSTAGE/PACKAGE RETURN S.50 25.72 *f.H 14531 12/31/92 RIFFS, INC. 39S LATRINE RENTAL/PARKS 70.76 14532 17/31/92 BRIDGEWATER TELEP14ON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES $55.40 34532 12/11/92 BRIOAEWATfR TFIEPMON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 66.39 34632 12/31/97 60I00EWATER TELEPHON 24 TELEPH+MIE CHARGES 47.71 34532 12/31/92 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGEE 26.09 34532 12/11/92 BRIDGEWATER IELEPHON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 55.78 34532 12/31/92 62I00EWATER TELEPMON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 45.04 9453? 1?/31/92 BRIDGEWATER TELEPMON ?4 TELEPHONE CHARGES 11.50 34632 12/31/92 BRIDGEWATER TELEPMON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 107.12 14532 12/11/92 6RI00EWATEP TELEPHON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 16.58 3453? 12/11/92 6PIOQEWATER TEIEPHON 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 35.19 34572 12/31/07 641"EWATER TELEPHON 24 GARAGE RENTAL/PW EIIPA 400.00 1.393.90 •Ch 34533 17/31/92 CENTURY LASS 276 OEGREASER/SHOP 9 GAR 96.30 14534 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 3S SMALL TOOLS/SHOP S GAR 76.57 i4S34 17/31/97 COAST TO COAST 35 6LO REP SUP/6HOP G GAR 94.45 14634 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 3S MTC OF 6LO/FIRE DEPT 6.19 ` 34634 17/31/92 COAST TO COAST 35 CHEMICALS/SEWER DEPT 5.94 34634 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 3S EOUIP REPAIR PARTS/PARK 2.12 ' 14514 17/31/92 COAST TO COAST 35 MISC SUPPLIE9/WATER 09 64.53 i BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 1?:03:14 WARRANT OAlI VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLA 34534 12/31/92 COAST 10 COAST 35 £QUIP REPAIR PARTS/SEWE 8.01 34534 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 35 MISC SUPPLIES/BLD INSP 6.36 34534 12/31/92 COAST 10 COAST 35 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/STR 39.80 34534 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 3S MISC SUPPLIES/PARKS 26.36 34534 12/31/92 COAST 10 COAST 35 MTC OF EQUIP/SHOP i riA 12.24 34534 12/31/92 COAST TO COAST 3S MISC SUPPLIES/SHO& 6AR 75.11 34534 17/31/97 COAST TO COAST 35 CLEANING SUPPLIES/LISR 26.78 408.45 34535 12/31/92 COMMUNICATION AUOITO 38 REPAIR FIRE DEPT PAGE 310.76 34518 12/31/92 COMPRESS AIR 6 EQUIP 358 STORAGE BOTTLES/FIR 2.486.84 34536 17/31/92 COMPRESS AIR A EQUIP 356 VEHICLE RED/FIRE DEPT 3.96 2.470.90 34537 12/31/92 COPY DUPLCATING PROD 4/ COPY MCH MTC/LIBRARY 70.36 34S3S 12/31/92 D 8 K REFUSE RECYCLI 611 DEC RECYCLING CONTR 2.203.?0 34539 12/31/92 FEEORITE CONTROLS. 1 56 CHEMICALS/MATER DEPT 544.73 34539 12/31/92 FfEORITE CONTROLS. I S6 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/WA 370.17 34539 12/31/92 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 56 MISC PROF SERVICES/WAT 36.00 950.90 341)40 12/31/92 HAPRY'S AUTO SUPPLY IS MISC SUPPLIES/MATER OEP 8.50 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 70 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/SEW 14.73 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 70 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP i GAR 45.99 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 70 MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP 4 G 42.83 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 78 YEN REPAIR PARTS/STREE 47.65 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 79 CORRECT CODING 19.09CR 34�i40 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 78 MISC SUPPLIES/FIRE DEP 15.99 34540 12/31/92 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 7S EQUIP REP PARTS/STREET 26.?? 187.92 34141 12/11/92 HOGLUND BUS COMPANY 92 VEM REPAIR PARTS/SYR[ 540.09 34547 12/11/92 HOGLUND COACH LINES 491 HEARTLAND *US CONTR 4.851.14 34543 12/11/92 HOLIDAY CREW OFFIC 85 GAS/FIRE DEPT 50.84 34544 12/31/02 HOLMES 6 GRAVEN SS LEGAL FEES/►ROPLAK OR 054.96 34545 12/11/02 INFRARED CONSULTING .90276 CONST COSTS/PW EKPANS 500.00 14548 17/11/02 INTERSTATE OfTROIT 0 121 REPAIR VEHICLE/%TREE/S 74.08 0 4541 12/11/92 K MART STORE 460 FIRE DEPT SUPPLIES 112.41 *CHF VCH BRC, FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 12:03:14 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 34546 12/31/92 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKIN 34549 12/31/92 L "N" R SERVICES - L 34549 1?/31/92 L "N" R SERVICES - L 34550 12/31/92 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE 34551 12/31/92 LITTLE MOUNTAIN FLOW 34552 12/31/92 LUKACH/JOHN 34552 12/31/92 LUKACH/JOHN 34552 12/31/92 LUKACH/JOHN 34552 12/11/92 LUKACH/JOHN 34SS3 12/31/92 MATERIALS DISTRISUTI 34554 17/31/97 MAUS FOODS 34SS4 12/31/92 MAUS FOODS 34644 12/31/92 MAUS FOODS C 84554 12/31/92 MAUS FOODS 34554 1?/31/07 MAUS FOODS 34554 12/31/92 MAUS FOODS 34595 12/31/92 MCOOWALL COMPANY 34556 12/31/92 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY 34956 12/11/62 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY 345f>fs 17/31/92 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY 34556 12/11/92 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY 34556 12/31/92 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 34S56 12/31/92 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY 34SS7 12/31/92 04ILLERBERNO MANUFACT 34550 12/31/92 MINNE6OTA STATE TREA 34639 12/31/92 MONTICELLO FIRE OEPA 34459 12/31/02 MONTICELLO FIRE OEPA 34SS9 12/31/92 MONTICELLO FIRE OIPA 34SSO 12/31/02 MONTICELLO FIRE OEPA 34559 12/31/92 MONTICELLO FIRE OEPA 34550 12/31/07 MONTICCLLO FIRE OEPA C/ Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLA 697 ANIMAL CONTROL CHCS 79.88 103 REPAIR LOCKS/FIRE DEPT 86.1? 103 PEPAIP LOCKS/SHOP E GA 42.00 128.12 709 REPAIRS/STPEET DEPT 48.33 586 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL 6.39 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 33.04 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 11.01 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 11.01 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 11.01 66.07 246 DESK/SHOP 8 GAR 70.29 100 MISC SUPPLIES/ANIMAL 43.41 108 MISC SUPPLIESLIBRARY 52.64 108 Mi SC SUPPLIES/CITY HAL 38.56 108 MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP i OA 7.98 108 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER 1?.24 108 MISC SUPPLIES/FIRE DEPT 6.14 162.97 111 CITY HALL FURNACE REP 342.09 115 UTILITIES 323.93 115 UTILITIES 133.65 115 UTILITIES 77.16 11S UTILITIES 770.96 115 UTILITIES 30.17 1/S UTILITIES 501.07 1.945.54 110 STREET LIGHTING REPAI 191.70 202 4TH OTR 6LO PERMIT CM 946.32 IDS POSTAGE REIMB/FIRE DIP 33.75 135 MI1C SUPPLIES/FIkE OEP 50.95 $IS OFFICE SUPPLIES/FIRE 0 14.00 131 SUBSCRIPTIONS/FIRE OE 166.00 ISS CLOTHING SUPPLIES/F10E 76.05 IDS MISC EIIPENSE/FIRE 010 219.62 500.07 1'CHt SCHE •CHI CCN SCH E1RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 12:03:14 WARRANT GAPE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING yA560 12/31/92 MONTICELLO PPINTING Disburaamont Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 137 FIRE DEPT FORMS 93.29 34581 1?/31/9? MONTICELLO TIMES 140 ADVERT ISING/HEAR'TLO BU 56.00 34561 12/31/92 MONTICELLO TIMES 140 BLO PERMIT INFO 40.60 34561 12/31/92 MONTICELLO TIMES 140 SNOW PLOWING INFO 40.60 34561 12/31/92 MONIICELLO TIMES 140 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 567.85 34561 12/31/92 MONTICELLO TIMES 140 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES 71.40 34561 12/31/92 MONTICELLO TIMES 140 BUDGET PUBLICATION 108.03 898.48 +t 34562 12/31/92 MONTICELLO VACUUM CE 141 VACUUM BELTS/LIBRARY 23.9? 34583 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34563 17/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAF 34S63 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34563 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34S63 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34583 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34563 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34583 12/31/97 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34563 12/31/92 NATIONAL BU',HIN6 PAR 34563 12/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAP 3456) 1?/31/92 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 34563 12/31/97 NATIONAL BUSHING PAP 34584 12/31/92 NOLAN PICTURIA 34505 12/11/92 NORTHERN STATES OWE 345GS 12/31/92 NORTHERN STATES POM( 14564 12/31/92 NOR THE ON pIATES POWE 34565 1?/31/9? NOPTHEPN STATES PONE 34585 12/31/92 NORTHERN STATES POWE 34565 12/31/97 NORTHERN STATES POW( 36SGS 12/11/92 NORTHERN STATES POWE 16565 12/31/92 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31•565 12/31/92 NORTHERN STATES POW( $4806 12/11/92 NORTHERN STATES POWE 144 F,OUIP REPAIR PARTS/SNO 30.83 144 VEH REP PARTS/WATER 47.60 144 EQUIP REP PARTS/MATER 27.37 144 VEH REPAIR PARTS/SEWER 42.60 144 BLO REP SUP/SHOP 6 GAR 34.09 144 VEH REPAIR PARTS/SIRE 595.70 144 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP # GAR 34.63 144 EQUIP REP PARRTS/STREET 6.97 144 SMALL TOOLS/WATER DEPT 7.45 14A MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP 6 G 98.11 144 MISC SUPPLIES/MATER DE 11.03 144 OIL/WATER DEPT 16.49 927.96 .90200 PICTURi•/FIRE DEPT 100.72 148 UTILIT " 149 UTILITI60 149 UTILITIES 149 UTILITIES 146 UTILITIFS 149 UTILITIES 149 UTILITIES 149 UTILITIES 169 UTILITIES 169 UTILITIES scl 2.739.46 230.04 4.180.)5 111.)8 423.23 13.69 520.07 223.63 093.29 810.88 0.14).09 a1 34568 12/31/92 O.E.I. SUfINESf FORM 159 COPY MACHINE PAPER/C 106.11 14401 12/11/92 OLION • 'SONS ELECTRI 160 6LO REPAIR SUR/$NOP OG 14.70 )4567 12/31/92 OLSON t SONS ElEC1R1 160 MTC OF )IRE OEPT OLD 221.01 34561 12/31/62 OLSON O SONS ELECTRI 160 MISC SUPPLIES/PARRS OE 14.17 34667 12/11/97 OLSON i SONS ELECTRI 100 MTC OF CITU MALL ILO 16.60 34461 12/31/02 OLSON O SONS ELECTRI 160 MTC OF LIORARt OLD 126.20 `34507 12/31/07 OLSON 0 SONS ELECTRI 160 INSTALL OF NOIS1/SHOP 106.16 14561 12/31/02 OLSON O SONO ELECTRI 160 MTC OF EOUEPNENT/SHOP 39.00 36667 17/31/02 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI 160 STREET LIGHTING REPAIR 30.50 RRC FINAL:CIAL SYSTEM / 01/09/93 12:03:14 l WARP.ANT GATE VENDOR lit NtRAL LMtCKING 34568 12/31/92 ORR-SCHELEN-MAVERON 34568 12/31/97 ORR-SCHELEN-MAVERON 34568 12/31/92 ORR-SCHELEN-MAVERON 34568 12/31/92 ORR-SCHELEN-MAVERON 34569 12/31/92 PAGE LINK 34589 12/31/92 PAGE LINK 3A569 12/31/92 PAGE LIN1: 34569 12/31/92 PAGE LINK 34569 12/31/92 PAGE LIN► 34569 12/31/92 PAGE LINK 34569 12/31/92 PAGE L117K 34569 12/31/92 PARE LINK 94570 12/31/92 PETERSEN'S MONT FORO 34571 12/31/92 RIVERSIDE OIL 34572 12/31/92 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 34573 12/31/92 9CHARSEP 6 SONE. INC 34514 12/31/92 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 34574 12/31/92 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 34574 12/31/92 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 34575 12/11/92 SYSTEMS SERVICE COMP 3&576 12/31/92 1000 & CO.. IMC./MIC 14511 12/11/92 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 34577 12/11/92 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 14511 12/31/92 UNIroe RENTAL SERVIC 34517 12/11/92 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 1&S71 12/31/92 UNI TOG RENTAL SERVIC 34517 12/31/92 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 14578 12/19/02 UNOCAL J&S19 12/11/02 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA C1.579 12/11/02 VASKO PU86I6H REMOVA Disbursem!nt Journal OESCRIPTIGN AMOUNT 625.77 *C 162 ENG FEE{/FALLON AVE 772.69 162 ENG FEES/BRIAR OAKES 520.69 162 ENG FEES/CARDINAL HIL 939.80 162 CREDIT ON PLAT REVI i.000.00CR 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 24.50 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 173.60 • t8S PARTS/STREET DEPT 112.90 496 GAS/STREET DEPT 955.50 227 REPAIRS/STREET DEPT 283.03 229 EQUIP REPAIR PARTE/STR AO.00 103 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER DEP 1.01 193 MISC SUPPLIE$/SHOP k 149.11 103 SLO REPAIR SUP/SHOP ' 412.83 582.95 �+ 202 UTILITY MTC SUP/NATER 277.35 393 SNOW PLOW BLADE 245.38 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 11.69 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 16.00 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 18,00 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 16.00 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 92.88 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 41.41 190.00 • 213 GAS/FIRE DEPT 8.10 S24 GARBAGE CONTRACTV 0 8.113.12 626 $ALE$ TAY/GARBAGE CON $21.19 S. 64 t. 1 1 1, 8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 12;03:14 i WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENtRAL CHECkiN.. 34580 12/31/92 WARDING LITES OF MIN 34581 12/31/92 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO 34582 12/31/92 WRIGHT CO-iNTY AUOITO 34583 12/31/92 WRIGHT WAV SHOPPER 34584 12/31/92 WRIGHT -HEUNEPIN COOP GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Ci 678 CONST COSTS/CAROINAL 14 2.65 670 WATER SUPPLIES 79.89 219 A00'L LAND FILL CH 10.696.0? 711 ADVERTISING HEARTLAND 234.00 512 UTILITIES 8.69 TOTAL 59.0 76.4 1 YF+: FINANCIAL SYSTEM °°?1/tNl93 08:46:?4 .VARG ANI DATE VENOOG GENERAL CHECKING 34585 01/13/93 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 34566 01/13/93 CENTRAL MCGOMAN, INC 34587 01/13/93 GOPHER STATE ONE CAL 34598 01/13/93 DYNA SYSTEMS 34589 01/13/93 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 34590 01/13/93 NORTHERN STATES DOME 34590 01/13/93 NORTHERN STAIES POME 34591 01/13/93 CITIZEN'S STATE 69 O 34591 01/13/93 CITIZEN'; SPATE BK 0 Disoursemsnt Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C 185 *FV* 30 *FV* 69 *FV* 50 *F V* 56 *F V* 148 *FY* 148 *FY* 34 *FY* 34 *FV* 34S92 01/13/93 DEPART OF NATURAL RE 124 *f Y* 141.93 01/13/93 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 56 *FV* GENERAL CHECKING TOTAL 38?.45 62.67 35.00 34?.92 ?4.00 54.96 1?9.59 194.44 16.864.5? 1.499.91 18.164.33 834.00 2.843.55 72.163.36 *C' *r BRC FINANCI Al SYSTEM 01/ 19/93 1 4:34 :28 WARRANT DATE VENOOP GENE RAL C111CXING 44594 01/19/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 34594 01/19/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 34594 01/19/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 34595 01/19/93 WRIGHT COUNTY DEPT 0 34596 01/19/93 MINNESOTA DEPART Of 34596 01/19/93 MINNESOTA DEPART OF 34596 01/19/93 MINNESOTA DEPART Of 34597 01/20/93 A 1 & T INFO SYSTEMS 34599 01/20/93 ARA CORY REFRESHMENT 34599 01/20/93 CONTINENTAL SAFETY E 34600 01/20/93 DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT S 14601 01/20/93 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE 34602 01/20/93 MARCO BUSINESS PROOU 34602 01/20/93 MARCO BUSINESS PROOU 34603 01/20/93 MONTICELLO CHAMBER 0 34604 01/20/93 MONTICELLO ROTARY 34605 01/20103 PITNEY BOWES 14606 01/20/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 34651 01/ 1$/93 QUINLA14 PUBLISHING C 014ENAL CHECKING C Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL 136 *FV* 44.20 136 *FV* 763.53 136 *FY* 2.90 610.63 275 *FY* 1.430.63 119 *FV* 76.40 119 *FY* 1.165.02 119 *FV* 34.97 1.296.39 15 FIRE DEPT PHONE CHARGE 19.20 409 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 63.00 256 FIRE DEPT EQUIPMENT 2,643.55 712 DEPUTY REG COMPUTER M 300.00 97 TRAVEL EXPENSE 69.00 106 MTC AGMT/TYPEWRITER 79.00 106 DICTAPHONE HEADSET/C H 95.65 113.65 133 REG FEE/OLLIE KOROPCHA 20.00 139 *FY* 225.S0 169 MTC AGRMT/POSTAGE MCH 10.00 219 COUNTY MAPS FOR RESALE 77.31 117 CHECK VOIDED 72.000R TOTAL 7.333.06 *CN *CH I *CHI BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 1?:01:58 Disbursement Journal WARRANT DATE VEI+OOR OESCRIPTIOIJ AMOUNT LIQUOR FUND 16655 12/24/92 GPIGGS. COOPER. & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 5.612.05 16656 12/24/92 JOHNSON BOOS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 3.443.29 14657 12/24/9? WEST SHEPBURNE TRIBU 800147 ADVERTISING 70.50 16658 12/24/92 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 WINE PURCHASE 102.10 16658 17/24/92 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 20.00 16658 12/24/92 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.813.18 2.935.79 16659 12/24/92 MONTICELLO VACUUM CE 800050 VACUUM CLEANER 179.92 16660 17/24/92 GRIGGS. COOPER 4 COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 4.715.34 16661 12/24/92 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 1.063.35 16661 17/74/92 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 335.54 1.388.89 16867 12/24/92 JOHNSON BOOS WHOLESA 800072 WINE PURCHASE 41Si.26 ( 16663 12/24/92 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 599.56 ' 166G3 12/24/92 QUALITY MINE & SPIRI 900040 LIQUOR PURCHASE ?.956.30 3.555.96 16664 17/74/92 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800072 LIQUOR PURCHASE 979.84 16664 12/24/82 JOHNSON BROS WMOLESA 900022 WINE PURCHASE $21.39 1.801.03 16665 12/24/92 WRIG14T WAY SHOPPER $00106 ADVERTISING 190.00 16668 12/30/02 BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA 900001 POP PURCHASE 756.10 16861 12/30/92 901001WATEO TELEPHON 900002 TELEPHONE CHARGES 106.12 10668 12/30/97 DAHLHEIMER OISTRIGUT 900009 BEER PURCHASE 16.143.95 16669 12/30/92 DAHLHEIMER OISTRISUT 900009 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 21.00 14.214.85 16659 12/10/92 OAVMOR HAMCO $00095 RECEIPT PAPER 11.00 16670 12/10/97 DAY 0ISTRI8UTIo$ COM 900010 $EER PURCHASE 750.76 1 18810 12/10/92 DAY OISTRI$UTING COM 900010 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 42.96 � 191.60 16611 12/30/92 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. $00011 $EER PURCHASE 1.229.95 C 18011 12/30/92 DICK WHOtESALE CO.. 900011 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 15.16 .2 62 NRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM nt/09/93 12:01:58 i WARRA14T DATE VENDOR LiQUOR FUND Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 16672 12/30/92 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 1.661.36 1667? 12/30/92 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 900012 BEER PURCHASE 81.60 16672 12/30/92 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 80001? MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 33.17 4.696.90 16679 1?/30/92 1.776.13 16673 12/30/92 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYM 800091 CREDIT DUE/JANUAPY 199 92.000R 16673 12/30/92 FLAHERTY'S HAPPY TYM 600091 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE ??2.00 12/30/92 tOEAL ADVERTISING 800128 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 141.95 130.00 16674 12/30/92 FLESCH'S PAPER SEkYi 800116 PAPER SAGS 206.43 16675 17/30/92 G & 9 SEPVICE 800129 MTC OF SLG/RUGS 46.52 16676 12/30/92 GRIGGS. COOPER i COM 9n0018 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 9.90 16676 12/30/92 GRIGGS. COOPEP & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1.73$.64 800070 OTILITIES 247.22 18861 1.745.54 15677 12/30/92 GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE I 800019 BEER PURCHASE 4.647.80 16677 12/30/8? GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1 800019 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE $4.00 4.696.90 16679 1?/30/92 GTE DIRECTORIES SERV 800126 ADVERTISING 32.00 16679 12/30/92 HOME JUICE 800136 JUICE FOR RESALE 74.2? 18680 12/30/92 tOEAL ADVERTISING 800128 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 141.95 16681 12/30/92 JUOE CANDY & TOSACCO 900021 GIGS AND CIGARS 285.96 16681 12/30/92 JUOE CANOV • TOGACCO 900021 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 16.70 362.66 16682 12/10/92 MIDMEST GAS COMPANY 800070 OTILITIES 247.22 18861 17!30/92 MINN DEPARTMENT OF R 900006 SALES TAM FOR DECE 14.068.46 10694 12/10/92 MINNESOTA GAP SUPPLY 600110 MISC SUPPLIES IS1.50 16685 17/10/92 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 900011 OFFICE SUP►LIES 1.56 168SS 17/30/92 MONTICELLO TIMES 900012 AOVERTISING 411.70 16807 17/10/92 NORTNERN STATES POWE 800075 UTILITIES 781.A6 =6989 17/10/02 OLSON & SONS ELECTRI 900019 SLOG REPAIRS )49.57 +6699 17/30/97 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 900011 LIOWA PURCHASE 272.14 Clbbvu 17/10/97 RON'S ICE CONPANV 900041 ICE PURCHASE $6.90 ESkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/09/93 12:01:58 Dis0ursement Journal I WARPANT GATE YEN^OR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT L IOU'OR FUND 16691 12/30/92 ST. CLOUD RESTAUPANT 800045 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 259.57 16691 12/30/92 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 JUICE FOR RESALE 33.60 16691 12/30/92 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 36.10 16691 12/30/92 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 CLEANING SUPPLIES 46.06 16691 12/30/92 ST. CLOUD RESTAUPANT 800045 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 35.15 410.50 16692 12/30/92 THORPE OISTPIBUTING 800046 BEER PURCHASE 18.109.15 16692 12/30/92 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 900048 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 129.50 18.236.65 16693 12/30/92 TWIN CITIES FLAG SOU 800049 FLAG 35.18 16694 12/30/92 VIKING COCA-COLA 601 800051 POP PURCHASE 309.50 LIQUOR FUND TOTAL 97.450.33 CITY Or MUNIICLLLO MON U ILV BUILDING DEPARTMENT REPORT MwIA of 0.om1 . 1992 Pr.1Y1S 6 451 I a9 Ifua Same Mmin Lao V.y 1-A4 Vlw PEWITS ISSUED M -h NOV Montle DEC Leal V.0 to Dw. 1. C.. RESIUENIIAL Noah 5 6 5 127 117 vtoI,tt n 1262.000.00 $2t/,10000 $115.20000 {2,3.5.60000 /3.917./00,00 Fxm $1,61.51 11.557.39 191667 $18.11676 130.418.67 —8140m 619954 NW.In /57.14 $1.16695 /1.9x1.70 COMMERCIAL lhl 0 a i8 2- V&~ WOOD 0D $10.50000 {6.263.30000 {1.099.10000 F- $60900 6121.50 $37.97570 66.327.69 S.Ih.,g0l $10.00 $525 $4.12968 $54795 INUIISI IMAL N~ 1 VaWllon 951.,6000D $1,281,90000 F— 44.736 95 99.09899 S."'IplM $25740 Wx095 PLWWNG N~ 1 1 2 .0 66 FM. $113.00 19600 9900 $1.116.00 it. 7.600 Sult6uep 12.00 1200 11.00 {20,00 93300 OTRLIISI Nu10o1 1 5 $ v.5W10n 90.00 1000 $000 r- $1000 15000 $000 9.04418- $050 $2.50 63 00 I OIM. PETWfS 12 11 7 209 217 1OM VAI UAl10N $362.00000 6227.90000 $115,20000 $11.123.90000 0.296.70000 I OIAI II.I.S $2,62051 {1,17169 99U 6/ $2.027.1 $49,64935 TOIN SURCII.IIDES $15300 611520 {5610 $5.57653 13,16960 CLAN NI/1011111 -E,-NUMBER TO WE 1-4 INII NA I UI6, N—t- T.— BYICAM91 V.19.w Th. V- L.0 Y... !irQ.l.m.Y 3 $1,51239 110615 9212,90000 50 30 111$2• 0 MUII I".mi1Y 1 0 r d71a 3 1190441441 3 a 11q muUe / e 499 0 0 pw. UU105 0 6 At 11 ItA I IONIIU PAU1 Ux.Yn05 3 1-500 $160 $4.50000 )1 m C—,.w 1 $12,50 9525 $10.60000 tl a2 1149911.1 1 0 .i LMI5INO All, 4 19600 9200 0$ 40 fl IR1C1UM'6 O—,n Pb 0 1 0.1. it 1: TUMNMURV PlRMT 0 0 I'M UOI II NW / 5 1OIMO 11 11,77. 03 611620 6-'27,80000 117 109 CITY OF MONTICELLO INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT Month of Decen"r. 1992 PERMIT FEES NUMBER DESCRIPTION TYPE NAMEILOCATION 92-1987 Basemenl nlnsn 515 00 AD Gary A Bonne HOSV422 Rryenmw Or. 192-t%B Intery remodel 5121.50 AC Hillside Partneranly55e Cedar St. 192-1969 House 6 pelage 5403.83 SF IVaWe Plus HomaL5191 Mallard Lane 192-1970 Howe 8 garage ISF (Prestige Bmlaersll 125 Hawthorne PI S 192-1971 Garage rool 1AD (David & Chert Kinnard/500 E Rim St. 192-1972 House rwaal IAD (Chanes ArlaorsON317 Riverview Or. 192-1973 Hou" 8 garage ISF (Value Plus HOnmW5220 Starling Or I 6403.42 I TOTALS I PLAN REVIEW 192-1980 House 5 ntiado ISF Value Plus Honnew5191 Mallard Lane 192-1970 House 5 garage ISF Prestlgo 800orall 125 Hawthorne PI S 192-1973 1House A garage ISF Value Plus MMOV5220 Stadulp Dr. + TOTAL PLAN REVIEW I I I I I I I $40 36 W79 $4034 $13749 TOTAL REVENUE $1.99009 FEES VALUATION PERMIT SURCHARGE PLUMBING SURCHARGE $1.500.00 515 00 $0.50 610.500 00 5121.50 55.25 $2300 $050 657.600 00 5403.83 $28.80 523.00 $0.50 1 $98.100.00 $567 85 $49.05 $27 00 S050 t 1.500.00 $15.00 50.50 S t .500 00 51500 $0.50 $57.200.00 6403.42 $28,60 $2300 SO 50 6227.900 00 51.541 40 $113.20 598.00 5200 1 $40 36 W79 $4034 $13749 TOTAL REVENUE $1.99009