Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Agenda Packet 04-26-1993
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 26, 1993 - 7 p.m. Mayor: Ken Maus Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Patty Olsen 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held April 12, 1993. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints - Introduction of Wes Wittkowski as area contact person for U.S. Representative, David Minge. 4. Consideration of variance request to allow a detached accessory building to be placed within the front yard setback requirement. Applicant, AJ Poach. 5. Consideration of reviewing open burning ordinance for possible amendments or enforcement procedures. 6. Consideration of approval of plans and specifications for 1993 sealcoatiing project and authorimLion to advertise for bids. 7. Consideration of making repairs to or replacement of the second stage digester cover at the wastewater treatment plant. 8. Consideration of ikmending personnel policy. - 9. Consideration of application for carnival license. Applicant, Monticello Moll. 10. Consideration of bills for the month of April. ll. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 12, 1993 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Patty Olsen Members Absent: None 2. Consideration of anoroval of minutes of the regular meeting held March 22, 1993. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Citizens comments/netitions, requests, and complaints. None forthcoming. 4. Public Hearing --Consideration of adopting a resolution relating to the modification by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Proiect No. 1, the modification of clans for Tax Increment (TIF) Districts No. 1.1 through 1- 14, and the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1.15, all located within Redevelopment Proiect No. 1. Economic Development Director, 011ie Koropchak, reviewed the Custom Canopy TIF program and detailed the pay-as-you-go formula. `i J1 discussion, Af r discussion, a motion was made by hirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to adopt a resolution relating to modification by the HRA of the Redevelopment Plan relating to Redevelopment Project No. 1, the modification of TIF plans relating to TIF Districts No. 1.1 through 1-14, and the establishment of TIF District No. 1.15, all located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and the approval and adoption of the TIF plans relating thereto. Motion carried unanimously. SEF. RESOLUTION 93-12. 5. Consideration of Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Loan No, 006 (Stephen P. and .loan M. Birkeland, dr.) dbn Custom Cnnopv. for compliance with GMFF Guidelines. 011ie Koropchak reported that the Economic Development Authority has recommended approval of issuance of an enterprise fund loan to Custom Canopy. Koropchak noted that the loan recommended for approval by the EDA is for $42,500 at a 4.5rh. fixed rate amortized over 20 years with a balloon payment in 5 years. Page 1 a, Council Minutes - 4/12/93 After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve GMEF Loan No. 006 for Stephen P. and Joan M. Birkeland, Jr., dba Custom Canopy, based on the finding that the loan is consistent with the GMEF Guidelines. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of authorization to transfer UDAG funds for Greater Monticello Enterorise Fund Loan No. 006 disbursement. 011ie Koropchak reported that liquor store funds available for the loan in conjunction with the GMEF program have been depleted due to the success of the program and due to use of liquor store funds for other purposes. Koropchak noted that an alternative source of funds, namely, funds available through the UDAG loan payback, is available for use in conjunction with the GMEF program. Koropchak stated that the UDAG payback balance as of January 31, 1993, is $77,780. The anticipated annual payback through January 2000 is $27,971. She went on to note that within the original UDAG grant application, the principal and interest loan payback was earmarked for economic development. Use of UDAG funds in conjunction with economic development revolving loan funds is, therefore, consistent with the purpose of the original UDAG grant. Ken Maus stated that it's good to see the grant money recycle and be used again in economic development efforts. After discussion, n motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Patty Olsen to transfer $42,500 from the UDAG fund to the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund in conjunction with the approval of Loan No. 006. Motion carried unanimously. Public hearine on improvement uroiect 93-02C. Cardinal Hills 3rd Addition. and consideration of a resolution awardine nroiect. John Simola reported that the project consists of utilities, street construction, drainage pond construction, and grading for a 50 -lot addition to the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Also incorporated with the project is about 1/4 mile of 8 -fl bituminous walkway located on the north side of School Boulevard. The engineer's estimate for construction cost was approximately $555,000. The City received 19 bids ranging from a low of $513,280 to a high of $793,739. The apparent low bidder is Ryan Contracting from Bur-navitle, Minnesota. Page 2 (` i Council Minutes - 4/12/93 Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the design, location, and cost of the proposed pathways alone the north side of School Boulevard and outlined n proposed formula for funding pathway development. Discussion regarding distribution of pathway cost ensued. No consensus was reached. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to award the project to the low bidder, Ryan Contracting of Burnsville, Minnesota, based upon a bid amount of $506,588, which includes construction of the segment of pathway leading from Eider Lane to Little Mountain School and does not include the pathway leading from Pelican Avenue to the Middle School. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 93-13. Consideration of annroval of the final slat of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Assistant Administrator O Neill reported that the final plat is consistent with the previously -approved preliminary plat; however, the City Engineer review has noted the need for additional utilities easement along the east side of Block 2, Lot 15, and 15 ft along the west side of Block 2, Lot 16. The engineer's review also outlined the need to enlarge the size of drainage easement areas. These changes affected Lots 1, 2, 10,,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, Block 2, and Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 4. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to grant approval of the final plat of phase III of Cardinal Hills residential subdivision contingent on the following: Execution of the development agreement, which includes the developer providing all financial securities associated therein; 2. Completion of modifications to the final plat as defined by the City Engineer. Motion curried unanimously. 9. Consideration of adoption of Cardinal Hills development agreement. Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested that Council consider adoption of the Cardinal Hills development agreement, which governs terms and conditions associated with installation of public improvements. O'Neill noted that the agreement governing phase III is very similar to the agreements that were approved with phases I and 11; however, phase III requires that the developer provide a letter of credit to cover the cost of tree planting. In addition, the agreement includes a provision which requires that the developer Page 3 `a✓/ Council Minutes - 4/12/93 provide the City with a letter of credit in an amount equal to do site grading, which is included with the public improvement project. The agreement requires that the developer pay the City for costs associated with site grading as the site grading bills come due. This letter of credit is necessary to guarantee this payment. Tom Holthaus, representing Value Plus Homes, Inc., of Monticello, indicated that he had no objections to the development agreement as written. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the development agreement governing terms and conditions associated with development of phase III of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Motion carried unanimously. 10. Consideration of a resolution declarine intent to reimburse t)roiect cost through future bond sale. Ri ck Wolfsteller reported that the City should consider adopting the resolution stating that it may reimburse itself through a bond sale in the future. New IRS regulations require that this official resolution be approved if any expenditures are made for engineering or construction prior to an actual bond being sold. Wolfsteller went on to note that there is not an immediate need by the City to proceed with a bond sale prior to actual work commencing with Cardinal Hills. The City does have sufficient cash flow available to pay for some of the engineering cost and also some of the contract amounts before needing to involve Springsted, Inc., in selling a bond for this project. The City has up to a year after the project is completed to sell a bond if it wishes to reimburse itself for any costs associated with construction. Since the City does have funds available for allowing the project to start without an immediate bond sale, it may be beneficial to wait before involving Springsted and that there may be other projects that could be combined with one bond sale later on. For example, the Council maybe in the future looking at an improvement project for storm sewer from Hart Boulevard to the Mississippi River in conjunction with the Monticello Clinic expansion. This project would qualify to he combined with the Cardinal Hills improvements under one bond issue, thus saving issuance cost. Since we can sell an improvement bond anytime within one year after completing a project, the Liming will depend on whether other projects are in line to be constructed or depending on cash flow needs of the City. Page 4 1 -.) Council Minutes - 4/12/93 After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fv1e to adnnt. a resnlutinn indiratina sn intent to reimburse our9eh,cs 0rough future issue for the Cardinal Hills phase III improvement project. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 93.14. 11. Consideration of a reauest to amend the Monticello Zonine Ordinance by rescinding Section 20.2 CCl, which requires that planned unit development proposals must include an area of at least 3 contiguous acres. Steve Crittman of Northwest Associated Consultants noted that the zoning ordinance currently requires a minimum 3 -acre site for PUD application. In his opinion, this standard is an antiquated one which no longer applies to contemporary development. A PUD, or planned unit development, should be able to stand on its own merits regardless of lot size, or it should not be approved. Many cities have acted to delete this requirement; therefore, he recommended that the 3 -acre threshold for PUD's be deleted. Ken Maus asked if eliminating the 3 -acre minimum would come back to haunt us. He was concerned that attempts to use the planned unit development concept as a method to circumvent the ordinance would be more likely to occur without the 3 -acre minimum. Brad Fyle expressed the same concern. Crittman reiterated that minimum lot size is not relevant to determining whether or not a planned unit development should be acceptable or not. A planned unit development must stand on its own merits. Benefits gained by allowing a planned unit development must exceed negative effects of granting variances to site plan performance standards. After discussion, a motion was made by Patty Olsen and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve a request to amend the zoning ordinance by rescinding Section 20.2 [C), which requires that planned unit development proposals include an area of at least 3 contiguous acres. Voting in favor: Patty Olsen, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Brad Fyle. SEE ORDINANCE. AMENDMENT NO. 237. 12. Consideration of n conditional use permit allowing a commercial PUD in a B-3 zone. and a variance reauest allow;na pvlon sign height in excess of 32-11 maximum. Applicant.. Taco Bell/Willard Murphv. Steve Crittman stated that a planned unit development is a process under which the City adopts a flexible approach to certain performance standards with the expectation that the resultant project will be more creative in its design and generally superior to thnt which could have been accomplished under the strict enforcement of the performance standards. In this case, he does not believe that the plan as submitted meets that expectation. A more thorough treatment of the Americlnn site should be accomplished, and the site Page 5 • r) Council Minutes - 4/12/93 plan should better integrate the uses than it does now. As designed, the two uses appear to ignore each other rather than act as a planned unit. If a site plan can he developed which more closely meets these objectives, then we believe the use of a PUD would be appropriate and approvable. Grittman went on to state that the request should he tabled pending a more enhanced site plan. With regard to the sign height variance, Grittman did not believe that a finding of hardship or uniqueness can be made. He recommended denial of the sign height variance and encouraged the applicant to pursue alternative identification methods if the 32 -ft height is deemed to be inadequate for its advertising purposes. City Council reviewed the site plan with the landscape architect in attendance and reviewed sign height issues. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to approve theconditional use permit allowing acommercial PUD in a B-3 zone contingent on development of a site plan that is creative in design and generally superior to that which could have been accomplished under strict enforcement of the performance standards as approved by the City Planner. Motion carried unanimously. A motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to approve the variance to the sign height maximum. The variance to the sign height maximum is deemed acceptable, as it would allow placement of a sign on an existing pylon, thereby reducing clutter created by the need to develop a new pylon; and the size of this sign as proposed is 97 sq ft, which is 103 sq ft less than the maximum sign area allowed on a separate pylon. The unique henefits derived from granting the variance serve to protect the intent of the ordinance governing sign height. Motion carried unanimously. 13. Public Hearine--ConsideraLion ofvacating easement --Old CedarStrectright-of- way. ADDIiMot. Taco Bell/Willnrd Murvhv. Assistant Administrator O'Neill stated that the owner of the Americlnn property requested the City consider vacating a 1,500 sq ft portion of the Cedar Street right-of-way, which is necessary in order to allow placement of the Taco Bell facility as described in the site plan. O'Neill noted that according to John Simola, the City does not need the entire easement for utility purposes; however, Bridge Wnter Telephone Company does have a telephone line within 2 ft of the proposed east wall of the Taco Bell. Any motion to vacate the casement should Ix,, contingent on the applicant paying the cost to move the phone line to a better position along the remaining easement. O'Neill also Page 6 / Council Minutes - 4112/93 noted that the City sold the original Cedar Street in 1981 at a price of $.39 per sq ft. The price was reduced due to the presence of the easements. ONeill noted that the City may wish to request payment for the easement in light of the fact that the original selling price of the land was low due to its being encumbered. John Scherr, representing Willard Murphy, indicated that any formula used for establishing the price of the easement area should include a credit for that amount that Murphy has already paid for the land on which the easement is located. It was the consensus of Council to use the existing sale price of $.39 per sq ft and adjust this amount for inflation and use it as a credit against the price of the easement area. After discussion, a motion was made by and seconded by to approve vacation of 18 ft of the 40 -ft easement along the Cedar Street right-of-way contingent on the following: Bridge Water Telephone relocation of the telephone line at the expense of the developer. 2. Cash payment to the City equal to $3 times the square footage of the easement vacation area (1,575) minus the original selling price of the easement area after adjustments for inflation. Preparation of a document which makes the Taco Bell property owner responsible for paying all potential costs associated with repair or removal of driveway surfaces that would be necessary in the event repairs are needed to existing underground utility systems. Motion carried unanimously. 14. Consideration of uuhlic works ohnse II facility studv and cost estimates. John Simola reported that in order for the City to proceed with development of phase 11, we need to complete the phase Il facility report and cost analysis. We must look at how the plan will integrate if broken into sections to allow us financial flexibility; therefore, he recommended that we move ahead with the feasibility study and cost analysis for phase II of the public works facility for a lump sum of $2,100. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to authorize a feasibility study and cost analysis for phase II of the public works facility at a lump sum cost of $2,100. Motion carried unanimously. Page 7 `� Council Minutes - 4/12/93 15. Consideration of oreliminary approval of the reolat of chase I of the Evergreens subdivision. Assistant Administrator O'Neill stated that the proposed replat modifies the plat approved in 1989 by removing six lots in order to provide room for the future extension of School Boulevard from the Kline property through to Highway 25. Once preliminary approval of the proposed replat is granted, City staff will be working with the City Attorney to develop an updated development agreement which would result in City acquisition of School Boulevard roadway easement. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Patty Olsen to grant preliminary approval of the replat of phase I of the Evergreens. Motion carried unanimously. 16. Consideration of proposed budget for West Bridge Park warming house/restrooms and authorization to proceed. John Simola reported that at the previous meeting, Council authorized staff to work with TKDA to redesign portions of the proposed warming house in an effort to reduce cost. Council also authorized staff to act as the general contractor and obtain quotes for labor and materials for construction of the warming house. The total estimated cost for all materials and outside labor amounts to $55,422. The work to be performed by City staff includes project management and inspection, backfilling of footings, installation of sewer and water service pipes and compaction of service line trenches, pouring of exterior sidewalk around building, installation of tongue and groove paneling in warming room half walls and vaulted ceiling, painting of the exterior siding and soffits, doors, and interior ceilings, application of sealant to the burnished block, tongue and groove paneling and floors. Brad Fyle noted that the cost is now near budget, and a new facility is needed at Bridge Park; therefore, he supporta authorization to proceed. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to construct the West Bridge Park warming house restroom building based upon the estimated budget of $55,422. Voting in favor: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Patty Olsen. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Page 8 Council Minutes - 4/12/93 17. Consideration of a request for (1) day setup/3.2 beer license for Ducks Unlimited Banauel, and one (1) day 3.2 beer license for the Julv R.iverfest_ celebration --Lions Club. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to grant the licenses as requested. Motion carried unanimously. 18. Consideration of a resolution authorizing application for ISTEA enhancement funds. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that the Parks Commission requests that City Council consider adoption of a resolution supporting application for ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Enhancement Act) funds necessary to build an off-road pathway connecting Monticello in an east/west fashion along the CSAH 75 corridor. The application for federal funds available for pathway development has been designed in response to the citizen survey, which indicated the need for improved bike and path systems. The off-road path along CSAH 75 will allow safe pedestrian/bike access to the existing sidewalk grid system and provide safe access to important points of destination, which include the high school, downtown, Pinewood School, Magic Kingdom Playground, NSP ballfields, and Montissippi Park. Included in the grant application are limited plans for landscaping and pathway beautification. O'Neill noted that the total cost of the project is estimated at $283,579. The proposed resolution calls for a City contribution of 25% of the project cost, which is $95,064. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Patty Olsen to adopt a resolution authorizing application for ISTEA enhancement funds. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 93-15. 19. Consideration of a conditional use permit which would allow the exuansion of an existing clinic building in a PZM (performnnce zone mixed) zone. Applicant. Monticello -Bic Lake Communitv Hosuital District. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital District purchased the clinic building located directly east of the existing hospital. In conjunction with the purchase, the hospital district is proposing to nearly double the size of the existing facility. The clinic addition will mirror the existing building in appearance. In order to expand the clinic as proposed in a 13ZM zone, the hospital district must first obtain a conditional use permit. Page 9 Council Minutes - 4/12/93 O'Neill went on to review the site plan in terns of its design and impact on the area. He reported that the number of parking stalls proposed with the clinic expansion meets the needs of the demand created by the clinic expansion; however, the site as a whole, including the nursing home and hospital, remains 45 stalls short of the minimum number of parking stalls required. Ken Maus noted that the clinic expansion and the potential for congregate senior housing in the area will result in increased traffic and parking demand in the area. In addition, use of River Street for vehicle and truck access to the nursing home parking and loading dock areas creates conflicts with residential uses along River Street. Maus emphasized the need to develop a long-term plan that would improve the traffic flow, parking, and general site organization. Brad Fyle concurred. He noted that an attempt should be made to provide direct access from Hart Boulevard to the nursing home without using River Street. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle, seconded by Clint Herbst, and unanimously carried to approve the conditional use permit allowing expansion of the clinic facility in a PZlN zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Staff review and approval of detailed landscaping plans. 2. Staff review and approval of design and construction of screening fence. 3. Staff review and approval of grading and drainage plan. 4. Hospital district providing casements necessary to construct storm water facility. 5. Hospital district consideration of working jointly with the City to design a long-term plan that serves the needs of the hospital district while being sensitive to nearby residential neighborhood concerns. Barb Schwientek indicated that the hospital district is very interested in working with the City toward development of a long-term plan for development of the site and that she would work with City staff toward development of a unified plan. It was the consensus of Council to authorize City staff and Consulting Planner to work with the hospital district toward creating a development plan for the area. Page 10 1 Council Minutes - 4/12/93 20. Update on second stage digester inspection at the wastewater treatment plant, and consideration of authorization to remove steel cover. John Simola reported that during an inspection of a wastewater treatment plant digester, it was found that the digester cover was extremely rusty and corroded. Some pieces of steel had already fallen onto the floor of the digester tank, and other pieces of structural I-beam came off when touched. Simola went on to review possible reasons why the corrosion occurred and steps that can be taken to avoid the problem in the future. The City Engineer has recommended that the tank cover should be replaced and that it would not be practical to try to repair it. Simola concurred with this recommendation and noted to Council that it may be best at this time to �p t-sep}ece the second stage digester cover and plan a thorough inspection of the first stage digester and sludge storage tank holding covers at the earliest possible time. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to determine that the cover cannot be repaired feasibly and to authorize staff to draw up plans and specifications for advertising for bids for replacing the cover. Motion carried unanimously. 21. onsideraAon of non -encroachment agreement with Federal Highwav Administration for reconstruction of eastbnund Count.v Road 75. John Simola reported that Wright County is proposing to use federal funds for a portion of the reconstruction of eastbound County Road 75. Prior to release of funds, the Federal Highway Administration requires that the City and County sign a non -encroachment agreement regarding the use of signs, setting of speed limits, and parking resLrictions on that section of highway improved using federal funds. Simola noted that the encroachment agreement does not create restrictions that are more restrictive than that which the City already enforces; therefore, he recommended approval of the encroachment agreement. Alter discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to enter into an agreement with the Federal Highway Administration as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. 22. Consideration of advertising for bids for paint striping services. John Simola reported in response to Council's request, staff has looked into the possibility of contracting paint striping for crosswalks, curbs, and parking lots. He recommended that the City Council advertise for bids for all striping. After receipt of the bids, we can weigh the increase in cost against the benefits of freeing up a vehicle and an individual for other public works related duties. Page 11 ; Council Minutes - 4/12/93 Council discussed the manner in which crosswalks are painted. Simola stated that currently crosswalks are painted in a block fashion. The Citv could reduce staff time by painting crosswalks in a striped fashion rather than the block fashion now used. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to continue to utilize City staff for painting crosswalks; however, staff should utilize the stripe method rather than the block method when painting crosswalks. Motion carried unanimously. 23. Consideration of modification of recvcling plan as it pertains to recvcling at apartments. John Simola reported that at the September 28, 1992, meeting, Council and staff discussed problems with recycling at apartments. Most of the problems noted were due to mixing of garbage with recyclables, mixing of various recyclables, and the amount of recyclables found in the dumpsters. Simola reported that the recycling committee suggested that apartments be charged for garbage service based upon an equal percentage of the number of times recyclables are improperly prepared or contaminated. Since there are four basic recyclables--cans, glass, paper, and plastic --and a minimum of six opportunities a quarter, an apartment building who has their recyclables properly sorted and not contaminated would receive 24 points, or 100% of the points available. They will, therefore, have 100% of their garbage bill abated. Ken Maus noted his concern that the City is bending over backwards for the apartment complexes and that perhaps the City should require that they pay for their total cost of garbage collection if they choose not to recycle. John Simola noted that the recycling committee discussed two additional options for apartments. The committee felt that if each tenant had their own recycling bin, it might better remind the individuals of the need to properly prepare and segregate their recycling materials. We would recommend that the apartment owners purchase a 3 -bag single bin from the City of Monticello at cost. The recycling committee also requested a change to the overall recycling policy regarding exemptions from the recycling program for participants using our standard 3 -bin system. Exemptions are given to the elderly, handicapped, or others with disabilities. We also grant exemptions ter extended vacancies. We have, however, in the past gotten requests for lifestyle exemptions from individuals who feel their lifestyle does not generate any recyclables in the home. Often these individuals indicate that they have very little or no garbage pickup also. It was the consensus of the committee that we grant a full Page 12 Council Minutes - 4/12/93 exemption from the recycling program to anyone whose lifestyle did not produce recyclables or garbage, but we would also then stop City garbage service to the property. If the individual indicated that his lifestyle would �o produce less than 9 recyclable products every 3 months but still had some recyclable products, we would reduce the number of points for that individual �V1 nit but still require they be part of the recycling program when and as often as possible. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Brad Fyle to change the current recycling program and require that apartments recycle at each opportunity, and that that their garbage bill be based upon the percentage of the time that their recyclables are found to be improperly prepared, mixed, or contaminated with garbage. In addition, apartment complexes would be offered a 3 -bag single bin system as an option. The policy should be modified to read that lifestyle exemptions be granted where the individual homeowner produces no garbage. In turn, no City garbage service would be available and would have to he contracted out separately. Reduction in the number of pointe required for lifestyle exemptions could also he granted in cases where there is justifiable reason for earning fewer than 9 points in a quarter. Motion carried unanimously. 24. Consideration of Arbor Day uroclamation and observance for Friday. Aaril 30, 1993. A motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to proclaim Friday, April 30, 1993, as Arbor Day and observe it by having a small tree planting ceremony in one of the parks. Motion carried unanimously. 25. Considerntion of Buildine Safety Week proclamation. 4/12/93 to 4/16/93. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to proclaim the week of 4/12/93 to 4/16/93 as Building Safety Week. Motion carried unanimously. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 13 Council Agenda - 4126/93 Citizens comments/aetitions. renuPRtR, nnel rmm�ln:QtB. (R.W.2 Former Wright County Commissioner, Wes Wittkowski, will be in attendance at the Council meeting to introduce himself as the new area contact person for U.S. Representative, David Minge. Mr. Wittkowski is making an effort to meet with each city council and has requested to make a brief introduction at the beginning of our meeting, as he also has to attend the city council meeting at Otsego. Council Agenda - 4/26/93 4. Consideration of a variance request to allow a detached accessery buildine to he placed within the front yard setback requirement. AoalicanC Allan Poach. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND 13ACKGROUND: Mr. Poach is proposing to build a 28'x 30'(840 sq ft) accessory building within the front yard setback requirement in front of his existing house. The house already has a tuck -under garage. The minimum front yard setback at this location is the average distance between the two adjoining structures. The two adjoining structures are the existing residential house with a tuck -under garage and the adjoining property to the east, a house and garage. In Mr. Poach's case, the setback of his house being 80 R from his front property line and the adjoining house and garage to the east are 21 ft from the property line. To meet the minimum setback requirement, Mr. Poach would have to place his accessory building 50.5 ft from the front property line. In referring to site plan "A", you will note Mr. Poach is proposing a 30-1i setback from the front property line. When Mr. Poach's house wits built, it wits placed way to Lite back of the lot. With the construction of this house on the lot, the lowest livable portion of the house, that being the basement, with the tuck -under garage as part of this, was constructed at it level very close W the elevation of the center of West River Street. With the low placement of this house on the lot, poses problems for surface water drainage off of this lot out to West Itiver Street. If the accessory building is placed on the lot as proposed, the rear portion of Lite building will have to be cut back into the side of the embankment because at this locution Lite grade changes and rises W go around the side of the house. Moving the garage farther hack to meet setback requirements would create drainage problems. One thing to remind Planning Commission members is that this is the property where the fish houses were constructed last winter and built for sale. The applicant should he asked if his intent is to build fish houses out of this detached accessory building. This use is not allowed, as building fish houses for sale is not it use incidental to residential uses. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Approve the variance request to allow a detached accessory building to be placed within the front yard setback requirement. Council Agenda - 4/26/93 2. Deny the variance request to allow an accessory building to be placed within the front yard setback requirement. 3. Approve the variance request to allow a detached accessory building to be placed in the front yard setback with the condition the owner is put on record that the variance is granted for the accessory use to be placed within the front yard setback requirement, that use is for a use that is found incidental to the residential use. The use of this accessory building is not for storage of more than one commercial vehicle over 9,000 lbs. or for the commercial use of this detached building to build fish houses in and sell them from this property. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Due to the location of the existing house on the property and with the lay of the land around the existing house to place a detached accessory building, this is probably the better of the locations for a detached accessory building to be built on the property. It could he argued that the lay of the land creates a physical hardship that limits the ability of the property owner to meet the setback requirement,. The nccessory building is relatively large. The magnitude of the variance could he reduced by requiring that the depth of the building lie reduced from 28 n to a lesser figure. The use of this detached accessory building should only be for an incidental use of the residential use of the property. The use should not be for storage of more than one commercial vehicle over 9,000 lbs. or for the use of a commercial building activity building fish houses or sheds, which are brought outside to be placed on the property W he sold. The Planning Commission recommendation will be forthcoming after the Planning Commission addresses this item at a 6 p.m. special meeting immediately prior to the Council meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the location of the proposed variance request; Copy of the ordinance definition for an accessory building or use; Copy of the minimum setback requirements; Copy of site plan "A"; Copy of site plan "13". CHAPTER 2 RULES AND DEFINITIONS SECTION: 2-1: Rules 2-2: Definitions 2-1: RULES: The language set forth in the text of this ordinance shall be interpreted in accordance with the following rules of construction: (A] The singular number includes the plural and the plural the singular. [B] The present tense includes the past and the future tenses, and the future the present. [C] The work "shall" is mandatory while the word "may" is permissive. [D] The masculine gender includes the feminine and neuter. 2-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: (AA) ACCESSORY BUILDING OR USE: A subordinate building or use which is located on the same lot on which the main building or use is situated and which is reasonably necessary and incidental to the conduct of the primary use of such building o= main use. [AB] ADDRESS SIGN: A sign communicating stroct address only, whether written or in numerical form. [AC] ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT: A temporary permit granted by the Zoning Administrator, after City staff approval, without a public hearing, granted to a specific individual at a specific location, to address those requests and proposals for specific uses that are not allowed under the strict provisions of this ordinance, but that present no apparent conflict with the intent of this ordinance. An administrative permit may be renewed indefinitely but cannot, under any circumstance, be transferred to another person or location. An administrative pormit may be revoked upon ten (10) days' written notice when and if the use evolves into a use determined to be in violation of this ordinance. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 2/1 1. , is less than the minimum required, it shall not be further reduced. No required open space provided around any building or structure shall be included as a part of any open space required for another structure. (C] All setback distances as listed in the table below shall be measured from the appropriate lot line and shall be required minimum distances. 1. In R-1, R-2, B-1, and B-2 districts where adjacent structures, excluding accessory buildings within same block, have front yard setbacks different from those required, the front yard minimum setback shall be the average of the adjacent structures. If there is only one (1) adjacent structure, the front yard minimum setback shall be the average of the required setback and the setback of the adjacent structure. In no case shall the minimum front yard setback exceed thirty (30) feet, except as provided in subsection [F] below. 2. In R-1, R-2, B-1, and B-2 districts, if lot is a corner lot, the side yard setback shall be not less than twenty (20) feet from the lot line abutting the street right-of-way line. (D) The following shall not be considered as encroachments on yard setback requirements: 1. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sill, pilaster, lintels, ornamental features, cornices, eavea, gutters, and the like, provided they do not project more than two (2) feet into a yard. 2. Terraces, stops, or similar features, provided they do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal structure or to a distance less than two (2) feet from any lot line. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 3/18 -I 'i , Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard A-0 50 30 50 R-1 30 10 30 R-2 30 10 30 R-3 30 20 30 R-4 30 30 30 PZR See Chapter 10 for specific regulations. PZM See Chapter 10 for specific regulations. B-1 30 15 20 B-2 30 10 20 B-3 30 10 30 B-4 0 0 0 I-1 40 30 40 1-2 50 30 50 1. In R-1, R-2, B-1, and B-2 districts where adjacent structures, excluding accessory buildings within same block, have front yard setbacks different from those required, the front yard minimum setback shall be the average of the adjacent structures. If there is only one (1) adjacent structure, the front yard minimum setback shall be the average of the required setback and the setback of the adjacent structure. In no case shall the minimum front yard setback exceed thirty (30) feet, except as provided in subsection [F] below. 2. In R-1, R-2, B-1, and B-2 districts, if lot is a corner lot, the side yard setback shall be not less than twenty (20) feet from the lot line abutting the street right-of-way line. (D) The following shall not be considered as encroachments on yard setback requirements: 1. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sill, pilaster, lintels, ornamental features, cornices, eavea, gutters, and the like, provided they do not project more than two (2) feet into a yard. 2. Terraces, stops, or similar features, provided they do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal structure or to a distance less than two (2) feet from any lot line. MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 3/18 -I 'i , 101 Af West g va ..S�detf ,x,18 t �dKe s;le Pk'v �1 fti l.� I a, 7 in N C0 5 �„ 0 ��\ 6 6 --� 66 6 G - 66 6( 2I \ in in c.: :(D 0 in `D 1 5 0 M to 25 100 6G 66 80 6G 66 00 i 66 loot' 66 66 80 66 66 80 66 G 10 G 13 l0 J � A u7 � i u7 u1 . LO 91.5 win in in 10 n a Z V 1 5 C,1 80 00 804 3 ; 66 Q-.G G 6 66 G6 0 <t4 GG 16666 G6 ` 6G . I, 7 Gin in 0 G 1 �n 3 Council Agenda - 4/26/93 s. Consideration of reviewing open burning_ permit_ ordinance for possible amendments or enforcement procedures. (H.W.) A. REFERENCE AND 13ACKGROUND With spring finally arriving, City staff has received a number of requests from individuals interested in obtaining burning permits. In some cases, the permits are requested for burning off weeds and dead grass, while in other cases, the permits requested involve disposal of trees on developing property such as the Halliger tree farm area and/or removal of accumulated debris such as that located on the Edgar Klucas property. The reason the Council is asked to review our present ordinance is that in most cases our ordinance prohibits burning if there is an alternative method ofdisposal or removing of the material. In addition, theother main restriction to issuing burning permits is that our ordinance requires the burning not to be within 600 R of an occupied residence. In many cases, this becomes very difficult to achieve, although in the past some permits have been issued circumventing this section ofour ordinance by supposedly obtaining permission from those within 600 R. The problem for both the fire department representatives and City staff is what latitude do we have in issuing permits which are in apparent violation of our ordinance, and who should determine whether there pre feasible alternatives rot, removal of the items requested to he burned? Our present burning ordinance is very similar to the state rules of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency with the exception that the City is more restrictive as to the provision concerning a 600-R distance from another residence. In my review of the PCA rules, they do not require the 600-R distance. The city ordinance also indicates that disposal of trees, brush, grass, and other vegetative matter in the development of land and right-of-way maintenance is an allowable permit request, whereas the state's PCA rules also allow burning for the maintenance of land. I believe the intent originally by the City was not to allow open burning permits for an occasional tree or brush pile in maintaining it person's property but for allowing larger scale burning when property was initially developed. It should he noted that the I'CA rules do allow local authorities to issue permits provided we adopt the PCA guidelines and rules, which we already basically have within our present ordinance. Although I do not know if we ever received official permission to act as the local agent, I assume this would not he a problem since our ordinance is in general compliance with the PCA Council Agenda - 4/26/93 regulations. It should also he noted that the PCA does allow local authorities to he more restrictive, so we can require distance factors and also limit burning to certain occasions even though the PCA may be more lenient. Some of the requests we have received recently have noted that other individuals have received burning permits such as Veit Construction and the East View plat partnership near Halligers tree farm. The inquiries usually state that since these other individuals have gotten permits, they would also like to be treated in the same manner and receive permission to burn. 1 think if we continue to ignore our ordinance, the can of worms will only get worse and eventually we're going to have to modify our ordinance to allow open burning or take a stand and enforce our ordinance unless it is proven to be impractical to dispose of the materials in other fashions. As I previously mentioned, the permit can be denied or revoked if 1) a reasonable, practical alternative method of disposal of the material is available, or 2) a nuisance condition would result from the burning. It appears that it's going to he very difficult for the fire department or City staff to deny permit applications if we feel there is a practical alternative method of disposal when it recent burning took place by Veit Construction, and it was apparently not feasible for this company to dispose of trees and brush within a landfill, even though that is one of the main services provided by Veit Construction. If a company wishing to clear land for future development owns many trucks and loaders along with a demolition landfill and it is determined that it would not be practical or feasible for disposal other than through burning, it will be extremely difficult to ever enforce this section of the ordinance on anyone else. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. The first alternative would be to recognize that previously some open burning permits may have been issued unnecessarily, Council could issue that future permits must meet the intent of the present ordinance. 2. The current ordinance could he amended by eliminating the provision regarding alternative methods of disposal and/or elimination of the requirement of being 600 ft away from an occupied residence. These two changes would allow more open burning pennits to he issued for basically tiny reason. If the section referring to practical alternatives was the only sentence amended but the 600 ft was still required, this would at least restrict the number of hurning permits to areas where it may not cause such a nuisance. { 'k, Council Agenda - 4/26/93 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Cenerally speaking, I do find the open burning ordinance to be somewhat contradictory in that it lists many ways burning is allowed but only if there is not a reasonable, practical alternative method of disposal. With this restriction available, it doesn't appear that anyone should ever be getting a burning permit since there is always an alternative method of disposal. It may not be practical or cost effective in the eyes of the applicant, but there are landfills that will take trees, stumps, and other materials that people request burning permits for. Recent burning permits that have been granted have opened the door for other requests, which is why this item is being discussed by the Council at this time. Because we have not adhered to all the provisions of our ordinance in granting these other permits, the staff does need direction on how to proceed with future requests. I believe the staff feels the ordinance we now have is better than allowing all burning to he permitted; and about the only provision we can actually change and still be a local authority to issue permits might be the 600 -ft distance factor. Even the state PCA rules prohibit open burning if there is a practical method of disposal other than burning. It is suggested the ordinance remain as is and in the future permits not be granted unless they are determined to fall within the ordinance. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of City's present ordinance; Copy of PCA open burning rules and regulations. CHAPTER 4 OPENING BURNING SECTION: 5-4-1: Definitions 5-4-2: Burning Restricted 5-4-3: Open Burning Permit Applications 5-4-4: Permit Denial and/or Revocation 5-4-5: Liability 5-4-6: Conflicting Laws 5-4-7: Recreational Fires 5-4-8: Penalty 5-4-1: DEFINITIONS: (A) SCOPE: As used herein, the following words shall have the meanings defined herein. (B) NATURAL/VEGETATIVE MATTER: "Natural/Vegetative Matter" means grass clippings, leaves, twigs, sticks, and branches, but not the main trunk nor primary limbs of trees, and the non -harvested parts of garden plants. (C) OPEN BURNING: "Open Burning" means the burning of any matter whereby the resultant combustion products are emitted directly to the atmosphere without passing through an adequate stack, duct, or chimney. 5-4-2: BURNING RESTRICTED: (A) No person shall cause, allow, or permit any burning in the city of Monticello except as may hereinafter be allowed. (B) Open burning may be conducted if an open burning permit is obtained pursuant to the requirements of this ordinance and other regulations of local, state, and federal agencies. 5-4-3: OPEN BURNING PERMIT APPLICATIONS: (A) APPLICATION: Application for open burning permits may be made in cases where fires are proposed to be set for the following purposes: 1. bona fide instruction and training of fire fighting personnel and for the testing of fire extinguishing equipment; 2. elimination of fire oR health hazards which cannot be abated by any other practicable means; 3. activities in accordance with accepted forest or game management; MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE V/Chpt 4/Page 1 ..5 4. ground thawing for utility repair and construction; 5. the disposal of trees, brush, grass, and other material/vegetative matter in the development of land and right-of-way maintenance. (B) RESTRICTIONS: A burning permit shall be issued on a prescribed form to the applicant if the burning is for one of the purposes set forth in (A) and the applicant agrees that all burning shall be conducted under the following circumstances: 1. The prevailing wind at the time of the burning shall be away for nearby residences. 2. The burning shall be conducted as far away as practical from any highway or public road and controlled so that a traffic hazard is not created. 3. The burning may not be conducted during the duration of an air pollution alert, warning, or emergency. 4. The recipient of the permit or his authorized representative shall be present for the duration of any fire authorized by the permit. 5. Prior notice shall be given to the local Department of Natural Resources forest officer, local fire marshal, or local fire chief of the time and location of any fire authorized by the permit. 6. Open burning for ground thawing shall be conducted in accordance with the following additional restrictions: (a) Fuels and starting materials shall be of a kind which do not generate appreciable smoke. (b) Coke used for ground thawing within 500 feet of dwellings or occupied buildings shall contain less than one percent sulfur. (c) Ambient air quality standards for sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide shall not be exceeded at occupied residences other than those located on the property on which the burning is being conducted. (d) Propane gas thawing torches or other dovicos causing minimal pollution shall be used when practicable. 7. Open burning of materials permitted in Section 5-4-3 (A)5 shall be conducted in accordance with the following additional restrictions: (a) The location of the burning shall not be within 600 feet of an occupied residence other than those located on the property on which the burning is conducted. MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE V/Chet 4/Page 2_ (.S (b) Oils, rubber, and other similar smoke producing materials shall not be burned or used as starting materials. (c) The burning shall not be conducted within one mile of any airport or landing strip unless approved by the director. 8. The following persons are authorized to accept application and issue open burning permits. 1. Zoning Administrator 2. Building Official 3. Fire Chief 5-4-4: PERMIT DENIAL; PERMIT REVOCATION: (A) Any permit application submitted shall be denied if: 1. a reasonable, practical alternative method of disposal of the material is available; or 2. a nuisance condition would result from the burning. (B) Any permit is subject to revocation at the discretion of a Department of Natural Resources forest officer, the local fire marshal, or fire chief, or the permit issuer if: 1. a reasonable practical method of disposal of the material is found; 2. a fire hazard exists or develops during the course of the burning; or 3. any of the conditions of the permit are violated. 5-4-5: LIABILITY: The granting of an open burning permit under any provisions of this ordinance does not excuse a person from the consequences, damages, or inquires which may result therefrom. 5-4-6: CONFLICTING LAWS: Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to allow open burning in those areas in which open burning is prohibited by other laws, regulations, or ordinances. 5-4-7: RECREATIONAL: Fire set for recreational, ceremonial, food preparation, or social purposes are permitted provided only wood, coal, or charcoal is burned. 5-4-8: PENALTY: Any person violating the terms of this ordinance shall, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor. MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE V/Chpt 4/Page 3, r� I 3490 Lexington Avenue North St Paul, MN 55126 League of Minnesota Cities (612) 490-5609 xuies or the rima adopt:eo per the state xegister, voiune 16, p. 865, October 7, 1991. OPEN BURNING RESTRICTIONS AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS 7005.0705 DEFINITIONS Subpart 1. Scope. As used in parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815 the terns defined in this part have the meanings given. Subpart 2. Agency. "Agency" means the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Subpart 7. Commissioner. "Commissioner" means the commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Subpart 4. pgleaated authority. "Delegated authority" means a town, home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 477.121, subdivision 4, authorized by the commissioner to issue open burning permits under part 7005.0767. Subpart 5. Incorporated land. "Incorporated land" means land within a home rule charter or statutory city. Subpart 6. hand used for farming. "Land used for farming" means land that is in agricultural use as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 17.81. Subpart 7. IPcnl authority. "L,ocal authority" moans a local fire chief, fire: marshal, fire warden, or local governmental official. Subpart 8. Nonattaimmnnt Arna. "Nonattainment area" means a geographic region that has been: A. designated by tho agency as violating a state ambient air quality standard; or B. designated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as violating a national ambient air quality standard in Codo of Federal Regulations, title 40, soction 81.724, as amonded. Subpart 9. Oman burning. "Open burning" means the burning of any matter if the resultant combustion products are emitted directly into the atmosphere without passing through a stack, duct, or chimney. Subpart lo. Owner or operator. "Owner" or "operator" means a person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or super•iises an open burning site, or who conducts open burning. Subpart 11. Practical. "Practical" means technically feasible, available within the general area where the material to be burned is located, and available at a cost that is not prohibitive for most users. Subpart 12. Solid waste. "Solid waste" has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 116.06, subdivision 10. 7005.0715 Subpart 1. Open burning without a permit. Except as provided in parts 7005.0785 and 7005.0795, open burning without an agency permit is allowed only on unincorporated land in attainment areas, and only if the owner or operator conducts the burning for the purposes described in subpart 3, according to the conditions in subpart 4, parts 7005.0725, 7005.0775, and 7005.0805, and prior notice has been given to the local authority. Subpart 2. Open burning with a permit. Owners or operators of permanent tree and brush open burning sites must obtain permits under part 7005.0735, and are subject to the requirements of subpart 4 and parts 7005.0725, 7005.0735, 7005.0745, 7005.0755, 7005.0775, 7005.0805, and 7005.0815. Owners or operators who conduct open burning for the instruction and training of firefighters must obtain permits under part 7005.0735, and are subject to the requirements of part 7005.0725, except as otherwise provided in the permit issued by the commissioner, and parts 7005.0735, 7005.0745, 7005.0755, 7005.0766, 7005.0775, and 7005.0805. Owners or operators who conduct, cause, or permit open burning on incorporated land or in a nonattainment area must obtain permits under part 7005.0735, and are subject to the requirements of subpart 3 and parts 7005.0725, 7005.0735, 7005.0745, 7005.0755, and 7005.0805. Owners or operators who conduct, cause, or permit open burning in forest areas or on forest land as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 88.01, subdivisions 6 and 7, must obtain permits from the Minnesota department of Natural Resources if a permit is required by Minnesota Statutes, sections 88.16 and 88.17. Subpart 3. Purnonea for burning. Open burning is allowed if conducted for the following purposes: � A. elimination of fire or health hazards that cannot be abated by any other practical means; B. disposal of vegetative matter for purposes of managing forests, prairies, or wildlife habitats; C. ground thawing for utility repair and construction; D. disposal of trees, brush, grass, and other vegetative matter in the development and maintenance of land and rights-of-way where chipping, composting, or other alternative methods are not practical; E. consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 18.024, the disposal of diseased shade trees as described in parts 1505.0230 and 1505.0320; F. the disposal or diseased or infested nursery stock, diseased bee hives under minne rota Statutes, section 19.56, or dunnage as required under part 1505.1420; or G. the disposal of burnable building material such as unpainted or untreated lumber, wood shakes, or other unpainted or untreated wood products generated by construction, where recycling, reuse, chipping, or other alternative disposal methods are not practical. Subpart 4. Conditions. Open burning must be conducted according to the requirements in items A to J. A. The prevailing wind at the time of the burning must be away from nearby residences and occupied buildings. B. The burning must be conducted as far away from a road as possible and controlled so that a traffic hazard is not created. C. The burning must be consistent with article 11.101(b) of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code as adopted in part 7510. 3120 . D. The burning must not be conducted within one mile of an airport or landing strip unless the affected airport or landing strip is notified prior to burning. E. The burning must not be conducted during the duration of an agency -declared air pollution alert, warning, emergency, or significant harm episode as outlined in parts 7005.2950 to 7005.3006; Minnesota Statutes, section 116.11; Code of Federal Regulations, title 40, part 51, subpart H; or Code of Federal Regulations, title 40, section 52.1220(c) (1) . F. The person conducting the open burning shall give notice to the local authority and to the local Department of Natural Resources representative when within an area under Department of Natural Resources jurisdiction prior to any open burning. The notice must include the time and location of the fire. G. Propane gas torches or other clean gas burning devices causing minimal pollution must be used to start the burning. H. The person conducting the open burning must be present at the burn site from the commencement of the burning until the fire is completely extinguished and if a permit is required shall have a copy of the permit at the burning site at all times. I. Fires must not be allowed to smolder with no flame present, except when conducted for the purpose of managing forests, prairies, or wildlife habitats. J. Fires set or allowed to burn for the purpose of managing forests, prairies, or wildlife habitats must be managed according to a prescribed burn plan approved by the managing agency. 7005.0725 OPEN BURNING PROHIBITIONS. Subpart 1. Prohibited materials. No person shall conduct, causeor permit open burning of oils, rubber, plastics, chemically treated materials, or other materials which produce excessive or noxious smoke such as tires, railroad ties, chemically treated lumber, composite shingles, tar paper, insulation, composition board, sheetrock, wiring, paint, or paint filters. Subpart 2. Hazardous wastes, No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning of hazardous waste as classified in chapter 7045 and Minnesota statutes, section 116.06, subdivision 13. Subpart 3. Industrial solid waste. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning of solid waste generated from an industrial or manufacturing process or from a service or commercial establishment. Subpart 4. Demolition debris. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning of burnable building material generated from demolition of commercial or institutional structures. A farm building is not a commercial structure. Subpart 5. Salvaae onerations. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit salvage operations by open burning. Subpart 6. Motor vehicles. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit the processing of motor vehicles by open burning. Subpart 7. Garbagn. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning of discarded material resulting from the handling, processing, storage, preparation, serving, or consumption of food, unless specifically allowed under part 7005.0795. Subpart S. Burning ban. 2:o persor. shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning during a burning ban put into effect by a local authority, county, or a state agency. 7005.0735 Subpart 1. Permits required. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning on incorporated land or in a nonattainment area without obtaining an open burning permit from the commissioner or a delegated authority under part 7005.0767. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit open burning at a permanent tree and brush open burning site as described in part 7005.0815 or for instruction and training of firefighters as described in part 7005.0766 without obtaining an open burning permit from the commissioner. Subpart 2. Permit conditions. The commissioner or delegated authority shall issue an open burning permit if the commissioner or delegated authority finds that the burning is for one of the purposes in part 7005.0715, subpart 3, 7005.0766, or 7005.0815, and that the burning will be conducted according to the requirements of parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815. The commissioner or delegated authority may impose other, reasonable conditions in the permit on the conduct of the open burning if needed for the prevention of pollution or nuisance conditions. The burning shall be conducted during the dates established in the permit and conducted under, the conditions of the permit. Subpart 3. Application p rocoss. In areas where there is no delegated authority, the applicant shall obtain a permit application from the commissioner. After completing the application, the applicant shall submit the application to the local authority for its approval. Following the local authority approval, the application shall be submitted to the commissioner for a decision whether to issue a permit. In areas where there is a delegated authority, the applicant shall obtain a permit application from the delegated authority. After completing the application, the applicant shall submit the application to the local authority for its approval. Following the local authority approval, tho application shall be submitted to the delegated authority for a decision whether to iosue a permit. The application process for permanent tree and brush open burning sites is described in part 7005.0815, subparts 7 and a. 0; To obtain a permit for fire training, an application must be suuwitted Loy the iiie dcVaLUncnL ur uLhnr enLiLy seeming to conduct fire training directly to the commissioner by May 15 of each year. The appl=cation must describe the fire department's or other entity's annual training plans and identify the estimated number of structures that will need to be burned for training purposes. Subpart 4. Information requests. The commissioner or delegated authority may request, and the applicant shall provide, any information additional to that required in the application form which the commissioner or delegated authority needs to determine if the open burning can be conducted in compliance with parts 78005.0705 to 7005.0815. 7005.0745 PERMIT DENIAL The commissioner shall deny a permit application submitted pursuant to parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815 if: A. practical method of disposal of the material is found; B. the burning cannot be conducted according to the conditions established in parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815; or C. a nuisance condition would result from the burning. 7005.0755 PERMIT REVOCATION. A permit is subject to revocation by the commissioner, if: A. practical method of disposal of the material is found; B. a fire hazard exists or develops during the course of the burning; C. the permittee violates parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815; D. any of the conditions of the permit are violated; or E. a nuisance condition has resulted from the burning. 7005.0765 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES JURISDICTION Designated Department of Natural Resources officers or fire wardens are authorized to accept applications and issue, deny, enforce, and revoke open burning permits on behalf of the commissioner for locations within their jurisdiction. 7005.0766 FIRE TRAINING. Subpart 1. Structurn burn training. Except for owners or operators conducting fire training in specialized industrial settings pursuant to applicable federal, state, or local standards, owners or operators conducting open burning for the purpose of instruction and training of firefighters with regard Lu btiuoCutes wust iu1lcw the techniques described in Structural Burn training Procedures for the Minnesota Technical College System. This document is written and published by the Regional State Fire Training Coordinator Staff, June 1987, and is incorporated by reference. It is not subject to frequent change. This publication is available at the Minnesota State Law Library and at the Fire Information, Research, and Education Center, 550 Cedar Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101. Subpart 2. Restrictions. Flammable or combustible liquids shall not be burned during fire training unless liquor fuels or arson investigation training is being conducted. The use of small amounts of uncontaminated diesel fuel or kerosene for ignition of live burn fires is not prohibited. Subpart 7. Livid fuels training. Fire training shall be conducted according to the conditions in items A to C when liquid fuels are burned. A. The fuel must be completely contained within a lined structure, such as a cement- or metal -lined container. B_ The amount of fuel to be burned must be the minimum amount necessary to conduct the training. C. If fuel is released from the lined structure, or if soil or groundwater contamination is suspected to have resulted from the burn, the spill must be reported and recovered as required under Minnesota Statutes, section 115 .061. Subpart 4. Conditionn. Fire training must be conducted according to parts 7005.0715, subpart 4, items E to H, and 700 5.0725, except as specifically authorized by the permit issued by the commissioner. 7005.0767 DELEGATED AUTHORIJY - Sub part 1. OnIngated authority to ianun nermitn. A town or home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county may issue permits for open burning other than for fire training or permanent trop and brush burning conducted according to parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0805, if delegated authority is obtained as provided in subpart 2. Permits must be ieouod on a form approvod by the commissioner and roc crdo must be maintained of all open burning permits isouod. Subpart 2. Obtaining authority. To obtain authority to iso ue opon burning permits, a town or home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county must adopt parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0806 as a local ordinance governing open burning. After adopting this ordinance, the town or home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county must submit the following to the commissioner: A. a written statement requesting the authorization; B. the name of the person or persons authorized to issue the permits on behalf of the town or home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county and a certified copy of the motion passed by the town or home rule charter or statutory city or metropolitan county designated such person or persons; and C. a copy of the local ordinance adopting parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0805. Subpart 3. Revocation of delegated authority. The commissioner shall revoke the authority to issue open burning permits if: A. permits are issued in violation of parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0805; B. permits are issued on forms that have not been approved by the commissioner; C. permits are issued by persons who have not been authorized by the delegated authority or whose names have not been provided to the commissioner; D. the delegated authority fails to maintain records of open burning permits issued; or E. the delegated authority requests removal of the authority. 7005.0775 COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS. Open burning must be conducted according to parte 7005.0705 to 7005.0815, local ordinances, state fire marshal rules, and statutes and rules of other state agencies, regardless of whether a permit is required by parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815. Nothing in parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815 shall be construed to allow open burning in those areas in which open burning is prohibited by other laws, rules, regulations, or ordinances which are more restrictive. 7005.0785 RECREATIONAL FIRES. Fires set for recreational, ceremonial, food preparation, or social purposes are allowed and do not require an agency permit. The material to be burned must be limited to a pile no larger than three fact in diameter by throe feet high. Only unpainted and untreated wood, coal, or charcoal may be burned. A person who operates land used for farming may burn solid waste generated from the person's household or as part of the person's farming operation without an agency permit, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 17.135. The burning of the solid waste must comply with the conditions established in part 7005.0715, subpart 4, the prohibitions established in part 7005.0725, and the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 17.135. 7005.0795 A town or home rule charter or statutory city located outside the metropolitan area as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 473.121, subdivision 2, by adoption of an ordinance, may permit open burning of dried leaves within the boundaries of the town or city, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 116.082. The burning of dried leaves must comply with the conditions established in parts 7005.0715, subpart 4, 7005.0725, 7005.0775, and 7005.0805. 7005.0805 LIABILITY The granting of an open burning permit or allowance of open burning without a permit under any provisions of parts 7005.0705 to 7005.0815 does not excuse a person from consequences, damages, or injuries which may result from the open burning. 7005.0815 PERMANENT TREE AND BRUSH OPEN BURNING SITES. Subpart 1. Permanent sitnn. The commissioner shall issue permits authorizing continuous use of a site for open burning following the procedures and subject to the conditions established in this part and parts 7005.0725, 7005.0735, 7005.0745, 7005.0755, and 7005.0805. Subpart 2. Trnn and brunh burning only. Only trees, tree trimmings, or brush shall be permitted to be burned at a permanent open burning site. Subpart 3. Altnrnativnn to burning. Only trees, tree trimmings, or brush that cannot be disposed of by an alternative method such as chipping, composting, or other method, shall be permitted to be burned at a permanent open burning site. Subpart 4. Location. A permanent open burning site must not be located within: A. 1,000 feet of an occupied building unless written permission is obtained from the building owner and occupant; B. 1,000 feet of a public roadway; C. one mile of an airport or landing strip unless written permission is obtained from the affected airport or landing strip; D. 300 feet of a stream, river, lake, or other water body unless berms or other measures are used to ensure that ash or organic material does not enter the water body; or E. a wetland as defined in part 7035.0300, subpart 119. Subpart 5. Site operation. A permanent open burning site must be developed and operated according to items A to J. A. A qualified attendant must be on duty at all times when the site is open for disposal of material to be burned and for the duration of any fire on the site. B. Access to the site must be controlled through a gate that is locked when the attendant is not on duty. C. A permanent sign indicating the times of operation, rates, and penalty for nonconforming dumping, and other pertinent information of use to the public must be posted at the site entrance. D. Burning and ash storage areas must be designated and maintained. E. Surface water drainage must be diverted around and away from the burning and ash storage areas. F. Burning must be conducted according to the conditions in part 7005.0715, subpart 4, items A to E and G. G. Prior notice must be given to the local authority of the time and duration of each burn. H. Fugitive ash emissions must be controlled and ash residue must be collected periodically and disposed of in a permanent solid waste land disposal facility or other method allowed by applicable statutes and rules. I. The fire must not be allowed to smolder with no flame present. J. Fugitive dust emissions from access roads and the site must be controlled as required by part 7005.0550. Subpart 6. Sitn tnrmination. A permanent open burning site must be terminated in compliance with items A to D. A. All unburned materials must be removed and disposed of through burning at another permitted burnsito or by other method allowed by applicable statutes, rules, and ordinances. B. All ash must be removed to a permitted solid waste land disposal facility or disposod of by other method allowed by applicable statutes, rules, and ordinances. 10 C. Areas affected by burning must be covered with so it and seeded Lu prevent erosion and to restore the site to a natural condition. D. A sign must be posted informing the public that the site has been closed, and listing the closest disposal site alternative. Subpart 7. Application process. Applicants for a permanent open burning site permit shall submit a complete application on a form provided by the commissioner. This application must be submitted at least 90 days before the date of the proposed operation of the permanent open burning site. The application must be submitted to the commissioner and must contain: A. the name, address, and telephone number of all owners of the site proposed for use as the permanent open burning site; B. if the operator for the proposed permanent open burning site is different from the owner, the name, address, and telephone number of the operator; C. a general description of the materials to be burned, including the source and estimated quantity; D. a topographic or similarly detailed map of the site and surrounding area within a one mile circumference showing all structures that might be affected by the operation of the site; and E. any other information relevant to the operation of the site, or as requested by the commissioner to determine if the site can be operated in compliance with parts 7005-0705 to 7004.0815. Subpart 8. Permittees. The permit application must be signed by all owners and operators of the proposed permanent open burning site, and the commissioner shall designate all owners and operators as co -permittees when issuing the permit. 11 S Council Agenda - 4/26/93 6. Consideration of anaroval of plans and specification for 1993 sealcoating Droiect and authorization to advertise for bids. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This year's sealcoating project is again somewhat scattered across the community. It involves some of the streets which were low volume and haven't been done for quite some time. The largest area includes portions of the industrial park. The list and maps of the streets to be sealcoated are enclosed for your review. This year's project involves approximately 66,020 square yards of sealcoating area. Approximately 27% of this area is on our new state aid streets. Based on an estimated cost of $.50 per square yard, including sleeping, the total project cost would he about $33,010 (approximately $24,097 on regular city streets, and about $8,913 on state aid streets). The 1993 budget includes $31,500 for sealcoating. Based on the above estimated cost, we would be required to use an additional $1,510 from the state aid maintenance fund to complete the project. Our sealcoating specs remain identical to last year with a completion date, including final sweeping, of July 1. 13. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative is to approve the specifications as drafted with the project schedule and authorize advertisement for bids at an anticipated cost of $33,010. ) A ?L) 2. The second alternative would be to modify the time table or the specifications as directed by the City Council. 3. The third alternative would he not to continue with the sealcoating portion of our comprehensive street maintenance program. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the stofTrecommendation that the City Council approve the specifications, plans, and time table as presented and authorize advertisement for bids as outlined in alternative #1. 1). SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the list of streets to hey seulcoated this year; Copy of map indicating those streets. IST. NAME DUNDAS RD. (100) DUNDAS RD. 5200) MINNESOTA ST. (700) +MISSISSIPPI DR. SERVICE DR. SERVICE DR. W. 7TH. ST. (200) W. 7TH. ST.(300) W. OAKWOOD DR. (000) W. OAKWOOD DR. E. RIVER ST. (100) THOMAS CR. CUL-DE IMARVIN ELWOOD RD. (20+) MARVIN ELWOOD RD. (200) PRAIRE RD. (000) PRAIRE RD. (100) PRAIRE RD. (200) PRAIRE RD. (300)_ PRAIRE RD. C300)TO END THOMAS PARK DR. (000) THOMAS PARK DR. (100) THOMAS PARK DR. (200) THOMAS PARK DR. (300) NTT BIT. WDTH SEOMT LOT SEALCOAT I DIA. SO YDS 40 1015 1981 4778 40 1540 1981 68441 34 580 1981 21911 28 1915 1981 59581 32 410 1981 1458 32 866 1981 3079 42 243 1981 1134 42 1091 1981 5091 57 620 1981 39271 24 2122 NA 56591 34 368 1983 13901 41 520 1984 99 32241 34 920 1985 34781 34 875 1985 3308 24 395 1985 1053 24 378 1985 1008 24 480 1985 12801 24 380 1985 10131 24 519 1985 13841 25 665 1985 1847 36 520 1985 2080 38 610 1985 2440 38 600 1985 2400 _ tA, A •N . �LCpAT VAN? # SEA "tt Council Agenda - 4/26/93 Consideration of reaairs to or realacement of the second starte digester cover at the wastewater treatment slant. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND As authorized by the City Council, the second stage digester cover was removed by Truck Crane Service on Wednesday, April 21. The removal of the cover went exactly as planned, and the cover now rests in the courtyard area of the wastewater treatment plant. City employees and 1'SG worked together to carefully block the cover up in place. PSG then proceeded to remove the exterior top insulation for a closer inspection of the cover and performed some sandblasting of the interior structure to aid in inspection and to allow prospective contractors to make an accurate assessment of the repairs needed. The vertical skirting on the cover appears to be as we had expected and should he able to he salvaged. The interior truss work is also as expected and will need complete replacement. There are numerous areas inside of the steel roof that have a significant amount of corrosion. This, coupled with the fact that the remaining portions of the trusses are securely welded to the interior of the roof, will make replacement of the trusses alone very difficult. It appears at this time that it may he more practical to replace the steel roof. If this is the case, the only portion salvaged from the entire cover would be the outer skirt and some of the supporting angle irons and heam work, which keeps the outer skin in it circular form. Since I am still gathering prices from contractors and painting and sandblasting firms, I will not have those numbers for you until Monday evenings meeti ng. My best guess at this time is that the figures for the total repair, including removal and reinstallation, could exceed the $60,000 figure Chat we were hoping for when we discussed this repair at the last meeting. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The first alternative is to authorize repair of the existing structure if the cost of the repairs appears to be within reason. The second alternative would Iw U) have OSM prepare plans and specifications for the replacement of the cover utilizing a 2 -roof or attic design, which would be more resistant to the corrosive atmosphere in the digesters. Council Agenda - 4/26193 3. The third alternative would be to prepare plans and specifications for replacement of the second stage digester cover but allow as an option the re -use of the outer skirt. It is possible some cover manufacturers may be able to utilize the outer skirt in their design. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since we do not have the costs at this time, staff will reserve its recommendation until those costs are available at Monday evening's meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None. Council Agenda - 4/26/93 Consideration of amending personnel policy. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND In 1991, the City Council adopted a personnel policy and procedural manual that at the time seemed to be comprehensive and covered a number of aspects concerning policies and procedures governing employees. The personnel policy as adopted should have replaced the personnel section of our ordinance, Title 1-6, although the ordinance has not been deleted or amended to correspond exactly with the policy. One area of the personnel policy governing sick leave usage has surfaced recently where our original ordinance mid the newly -adopted personnel policy differ on usage allowed. Originally, up to 3 days of sick leave was allowed to be used by an employee in the event of a serious illness to a member of the immediate family. The immediate family was defined to mean mother, father, husband, wife, son, daughter, brother, or sister of the employee. The new language concerning sick leave language within our personnel policy does not allow an employee to use sick leave to attend to an immediate family member because of it serious illness. Actually, the personnel policy specifically states that employees are required to take vacation or leave without pay for that purpose. Since there is it conflict between our original ordinance and the new policy concerning this usage, the Council is asked to clarify whether they are in agreement with the present policy or would be amenable to changing the personnel policy to allow employees to use sick leave for serious illness of family members. I think, personally, that if an employee's immediate family is actually seriously ill and, for example, requiring hospital stay, the usage of sick leave by an employee does seem appropriate in this case. The problem may arise in the definition of what is considered serious illness, but I think Chat can be covered by having the employee's immediate supervisor or the City Administrator use their discretion. 1 don't think that if the policy is amended to allow sick leave to hL used in these cases that we would see an increase in absenteeism by employees, ars if there is now a serious illness in the family, employees are still taking time off but using, in most cases, comp time that they hove accumulated. If an employee should be attending to a family member, it may he more beneficial for the City to allow the employee to use sick leave rather t,hao allowing the sick leave to remain available for severance benefit formula usage. 10 Council Agenda - 4/26/93 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. If the Council is in agreement with the logic of allowing an employee to use sick leave benefits for a serious illness of a family member, the personnel policy can be amended as proposed. AL 2. If the Council feels that sick leave should be used only for the employee's own illness, the personnel policy can he left as is and not amended at this time. n C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It's the opinion of the City Administrator that allowing an employee to use their own sick leave to attend to a seriously ill family member would be appropriate. I think the term serious becomes the main discretionary factor, and any changes should not allow employees to use sick leave for any minor illness of a family member. Current laws do require employers such as the City to grant employees the right to use sick leave for attending to illnesses of children, but it does not require the City to expand this to other family members such as spouses or parents. As far as state statutes are concerned, all employees can take sick leave for attendance to their children's illnesses whether they are considered serious or not. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of present ordinance allowing 3 days' sick leave for serious illness; Copy of present personnel policy section requiring employees to take vacation or leave without pay for that purpose. J n� lea • S`o l iL PPESE-&* o R n. -,V+ v c E In the event of death or serious illness in the immediate family, a maximum of three (3) days sick leave shall be allowed. nurkman's compensation tenefits shall be credited against the compensation due an employee using sick leave benefits. (C) PROOF REQUIRED: In order to be eligible for sick leave .with pay, an employee must: Report within one-half (1/2) hour of the beginning of his work day to his department head the reason for his absence. Keep his department head informed of his condition if the absence is more than three (3) days duration. Submit a medical certificate for any absence if required by the department head or Administrator. (D) PENALTY: Claiming sick leave when physically fit except as permitted in this section may be cause for disciplinary action, including transfer, suspension, demotion, or dismissal. (E) IMMEDIATE FAMILY: Immediate family shall mean mother, father, husband, wife, son, daughter, brother, or sister of the employee. 1-6-19: ACCRUED DURING LEAVE: Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating vacation or sick leave. 1-6-20: MILITARY LEAVE: All municipal employees who: Are members of the Officers' Reserve Corps of the United States of America or of the Enlisted Reserve: Shall be subject to call or induction into federal service by the President of the United States, or when ordered by proper authority to active no ncivilian duty shall be entitled to a leave of absence for the period of such active service, without loss of status, and if such employee shall have been in the service of the municipality for at least six (6) months Immediately preceding call to service, he shall receive the difference between his regular municipal pay and the lessor military pay for a period of fifteen ( 15) days of such military leave in the case of Reserves or National Guard personnel and full pay for fifteen (15) days in the case of active military duty of prolonged duration. 1-6-21: LEAVE OF ABSENCE WITHOUT PAY: (A) Upon request of an employee, leave of absence without pay may be granted by the Administrator taking into consideration good conduct, length of service, and efficiency of the employee and the general good of the municipal service. Such leave of absence shall not exceed a period of ninety (90) days, provided that the same may be extended beyond such period if the leave of absence is for MONTICELLO CITY ORDINANCE TITLE I/Chpt 6/pago 8 C pQfsF.J-�, y 7. Sick Leave - A. All regular, full-time employees shall be entitled to be paid accumulated sick leave at the rate of one (1) eight- hour day or equivalent for each month of continuous service. Sick leave will be granted in not less than one hour units, which is to mean that if any time less than one (1) hour is used, one (1) hour will be charged. Maximum accumulation shall be one hundred (100) days, except that employees who have accumulated in excess of one hundred (100) days as of the adoption of this policy may accumulate up to, but not exceeding, 150 days. B. Sick leave shall be granted only in case of necessity and actual sickness or disability injury to the employee, including pregnancy related sickness or disability to the employee, or for dental appointments, optical appointments, and physical examinations. Dental appointments and physical examinations must receive prior approval by the employee's supervisor. All regular, full-time employees who have worked for the City for at least 12 consecutive months may use personal sick leave benefits for absences due to an illness of the employee's child for such reasonable periods as the employee's attendance with the child may be necessary, on the same terms the employee is able to use sick leave benefits for the employee's own illness. In the case of gtt,epdance to other family members, employees are reciuiLpd to take vacation or leave without Day for that purpose. C. No sick leave will be paid to employees while actually working either for the City or others. D. A doctor's certificate may be required for sick leave absence; however, if any sick leave exceeds three (3) days induration, a doctor's certificate must be provided which certifies that the employee is sick or injured to the degree that prevents him/her from performing his/her FILES \PERSONN.POL: 3/11/91 Pago 16 ?Ro posed, POLICY 7. Sick Leave - A. All regular, full-time employees shall be entitled to be paid accumulated sick leave at the rate of one (1) eight- hour day or equivalent for each month of continuous service. Sick leave will be granted in not less than one hour units, which is to mean that if any time less than one (1) hour is used, one (1) hour will be charged. Maximum accumulation shall be one hundred (100) days, except that employees who have accumulated in excess of one hundred (100) days as of the adoption of this policy may accumulate up to, but not exceeding, 150 days. B. Sick leave shall be granted only In case of necessity and actual sickness or disability injury to the employee, including pregnancy related sickness or disability to the employee, or for dental appointments, optical appointments, and physical examinations. Dental appointments and physical examinations must receive prior approval by the employee's supervisor. All regular, full-time employees who have worked for the City for at least 12 consecutive months may use personal sick leave benefits for absences due to an illness of the employee's child for such reasonable periods as the employee's attendance with the child may be necessary, on the same terms the employee is able to use sick leave benefits for the employee's own Illness. In the case of attendance to other immediate family members is required because of a serious illness, a maximum of 4 days shall be allowed. C. No sick leave will be paid to employees while actually working either for the City or others. D. A doctor's certificate may be required for sick leave absence; however, if any sick leave exceeds throe (3) days in duration, a doctor's certificate must be provided which certifies that the employee is sick or injured to the degree that prevents him/her from performing his/her FILES\PERSONN.POL: 4/22/93 Page 16 Council Agenda - 4/26/93 9. Consideration of aoalication for carnival license. ADnliCant. Monticello Mall Merchants. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND 13ACKGROUND: Mr. Gene Decker, representing the Monticello Mall Merchants Association, has applied for a license to have a carnival operate on the mall property May 19 through May 23. The name of the carnival is Chuck's Amusements, Inc., of Elk River. City ordinances require that the City Council approve the license for carnivals, circuses, and traveling shows. S' The current fee established within the ordinance for the carnival is $100 day and $50 per day thereafter, although the fees can be waived for non-profit organizations. It is my understanding the Monticello Mall Merchants Association will be requesting that the fees be waived for their group. City ordinances also require proof of liability insurance, which the carnival has supplied, and also requires a surety bond in the amount of $5,000, which the Mall Association will be asking to be waived. The surety hoed requirement is to provide protection to the City of Monticello to ensure that all applicable federal, state, and city regulations are adhered to. Normally, it surety Iwnd is obtained by the City from contractors, etc., when work is performed on city property or within city street right-of-ways. The surety bond insures that any damage to our property is repaired. While the carnival proposed will occur on the mall parking lot (private property), the City may still want to require a surety bond to insure that the carnival meets all other city regulations. For example, the carnival, when setting up or disnant.ling, could cause damage to something on our boulevard or right-of-way, and the bond would insure that the carnival would be liable for those repairs. As an example, when the circus was held at Pinewood last year, the City did not obtain a surety hond since it was held on private property; but we are now finding out it may have been beneficial to the City to have one in that the circus and/or Chamber did post advertisements on various light poles in the downtown area. And when these advertisements were removed, the tape fastening the advertisements to the pole has remained and will require the City to sand and repaint those spots. Off -premise signs are technically in violation of our city ordinance, and the surety bond would have allowed its to collect any damages we may now experience. 12 Council Agenda • 4/26193 Unless the carnival is a large enterprise, it would appear that the mall would have sufficient parking area to accommodate the merchants and this amusement activity without creating traffic problems along 7th Street. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the issuance of a carnival license to the Monticello Mall U Merchants Association and waive the daily fees by recognizing the Association as a non-profit organization. Qv 2. Approve the carnival license and waiving of the fees, along with the waiving of the surety bond requirement. The carnival still has supplied insurance coverage. 3. Approve the license contingent upon the normal fees being collected and surety bond being required. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: From a location standpoint, the Monticello Mall should have adequate space to allow a carnival to operate and still have sufficient parking on site. I'm not sure if the Monticello Mall Merchants Association can he considered a non- profit organization, but the staff' does not have a problem with the fees being waived if the Council desires. From the standlinint of requiring a surety bond, there is only a slight, remote possibility that any damage would occur to public property, as this carnival will be on private property; but as I mentioned earlier, it does appear that the City will incur some expense for sanding and repainting our light poles downtown because of the circus advertisements that were placed on our poles. Had we had Li surety hond from the circus, we would probably be able to get the insurance company to reimburse us for this cost. 1). SUPPORTING IATA: Copy of appli cation; Copy of certificate of insurance from the carnival. 13 CITY OF MONTICELLO TRAVELING SHOW APPLICATION Fee: $100 - let day, $ 50 Pere°°��iter Applicant Name: J0. L � J Address: =.rJ% ✓l).J'-:T l T. Phone Number: h". Business Name: Address: Phone Number: /2 Name of Organisation Sponsoring Amusement (if any): Location where Show will be Held: ,� /* /r- r? fn Date(s) of Carnival or Show: Name of Insurance Company (proof of is urate shall be provided / 7.�.L with application): •/ 11Ae A / /�o- minimum requirements are: $100,000 - injury, liability $300,000 - each occurrence $ 50,000 - property damage SURETY BOND REQUIREMENTS: A surety bond in the amount of $5,000 a hall accompany application to ensure that all federal, state, and local regulations are adhered to. 111 Applicant 8lgnet re (For City use Only) Receipt 0 Approved Denied City Signature TRAVELINO."P: 9/18/91 A GOP -9.. CERTIFlCATE OF INSURANCE �, SSUE DAT! IMMIDOIY .. 3. 03/29/93 rRBDMCu THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND Beaudry Insurance AgtnCy CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE 506 Freeport Avenue to DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE OW. Elk River, HN 55330 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE Blackburn, Nickels 6 S=i:h Inc eoMPANY -- -- - - PO Box 367 LITER A Capitol Indemnity Corporation Minnetonka, MN 55343 compAH. nT1uwE0 -- ------ - --- LETTER B COMPANY C - - — - - CHUCK'S AMUSCIENTS, INC. LETTER 14380 NE 87th Street COMPANY D - Elk River, MN 55330 LETTER cLITTEowANY R E -- --- - - I ! COVERAGES _ -• THIS,5 TO CERTIFY THAT THE POUDIES OF INSURANCE USED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REOUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. ME INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITION$ OF SUCH POLICIES, LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. coTYFE OF INSURANCE AFOIKY NUNNX DOT! IAEFFIE rvn �1 AIWIATNNI LIMITS aeNERILLLNUT GENERAL AGGREGATE 1 2,000,000. A X =MIIERCIAL GENERAL UAERITY PROOUCTS.COMPIOF AGO 1 2,000,000. CLAIMS MADE - X GTR CP 24946-01 06/01/92 06/01/93 PERSONAL A AD' INJURY 1 1,000,000. CwNER'5 A CONTRACTOR'S PROT EACH OCCURRENCE 1 1 000 000 FIRE DAMAGE IAq FHF "1 1 , 50,000. MED EOEN"..E LNH eNN D.Fm i i , oon AUTOWOULK UAWLM COMBINED SINGLE 1 AMY .UTO LIMIT ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY NUURY SCHEDULED AUTOS I►Fr FHNHI 1 HIRED AUTOS _ BOORT MJUPY 1 NONOWNED AUTOS IP. ARbFnII GARAGE UABILITY PROFERTY DAMAGE 1 EXUF. UABRITY EACH OCCURREMCS 1 — _— - UMWELLA FORM AG LAEGATB 1 OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM WORAER'S COBIPmAT10R STATUTORY LIMITS EACH ACCIDENT 1 AND DISEAN-POLCY LIMIT 1 EVLOYEAW UABUn DISlAN-EACH EMFIOr[E 1 OTNEA OEBL•WPTION G OPCKA TRIHVLOWTNNgW[MICLIS1f1KDLL ITEMS Amuaoment Rides May 19-23, 1993. I CERTIFICATE MOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIDED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE City Of MOnticallo I EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TC Mont ieDllo Ma rehants AOBOC MAL DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE Monticello Mall LEFT. BUT PAILUR9 TO MAIL DUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIDATNDN OR 200 Went Seventh Street LIABILITY OF ANYKINDg0N THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTO OR REPRESENTATIVES Monticello, MN 55362 �ABTNG1nnD� JE ESRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 03/19/93 14:28:71 .AkkANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 34909 03/19/93 Mrd DEPART OF NATURAL 34910 03/19/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 34911 03/19/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 34912 03/19/93 KRAEMER/WANOA 34913 03/19/93 WAPHING LITES OF MIN 34914 03/19/93 UNIVERSITY OF MINNES 34915 03/19/93 COMMUNICA11ON AUOITO 34916 03/19/93 COMPUTER PARTS E SER 3491/ 03/19/93 FOSTER-FRANZEN-CARLS 34919 03/19/93 14OLMES & GRAVEN 14919 03/19/93 HOST/GARY 34910 03/19/93 J M OIL COMPANY 34921 03/19/93 KALPIN/VIRGIL 34922 03/19/93 KOROPCMAK/OLIVE 34,923 03/19/9) L "N" R SERVICES - L 31,923 03/19/93 L "N" R SEPVICES - L 34924 03/19/93 PARK EGUPMENT COMPAN 34925 03/19/98 PITNEY $OWES 34929 03/19/98 RIVERSIDE OIL 34927 03/19/98 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO. 34929 03/19/98 UNIVERSITY OF MINNES 34979 03/19/93 UNIVERSITY OF MINNES 34929 03/19/93 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO 34929 03/19/93 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO C Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Cl 118 WATEF°CRAFT/BOAT/ATV R 712.00 118 TITLEO BOATS 38.00 219 TAKES/OUTLOT A/C C 4.327.26 358 kEIMB/COLLEGE COURSE 188.25 678 REG FEE/R MACK/T MOORE 80.00 212 REG FEE/ROGER MACK 35.00 38 NEW RADIO INSTALL/FIR 765.70 500 COMPUTER MTC AGRMT/ 2.870.04 61 BOND/TREASURER/FIRE 0 175.00 86 NRA LEGAL FEES 31.25 721 TRAVEL EXPENSE/FIRE OE 85.70 95 GAS/STREET DEPT 889.20 .90795 MAIL BOX REPLACEMENT 18.35 97 TRAVEL EXPENSE 37.52 103 NEW KEYS/STREET DEPT 204.73 103 REPAIR BRKEN LOCKS/PA 100.98 305.61 IS4 SHOP R GARAGE SUPPLIES 22.78 189 POSTAGE MCH MTC/C NAL 114.00 496 Oil/STREtT DEPT 16.09 698 SHOP SUPPLIES 90.54 212 REO FEE/J ONEILL/PLAN 30.00 717 REO FEE/J ONEILL/DUE T 50.00 90.00 670 WATER METERS.ETC. 1.041.99 610 UTILITY MTC SUPPLIES 109.89 1.750.58 ..: L •c. •U BPC FIu•v:IAL SYSTEM 03/19/93 14128:41 4ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 34930 03/19/93 WEIN/JERRY 34931 03/19/93 WEST PUBLISHING COMP 34932 03/19/93 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE GENERAL CHECKING L\ D1 i t ,journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Cl 395 TRAVEL EXPENSE/FIRE 0 317.56 250 93 MN SESSION LAW 800 130.46 654 MEDICINE SUPPLIES/SHO 158.52 TOTAL 12.728.41 0 891C FTNArJCIAI SYSTEM 03/3t/93 13t56t43 WARRANT DATE VENDOR Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C lit NtKAL CHFCKING 34887 03/31/93 KRAMETER i ASSOCIATES 688 CNECK VOIDED 1.575.00Ck 34983 03/31/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 198.00 34934 03/31/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 TITLED WAIERCRAFi 10.00 34935 03/31/93 FIREFIGHTER TRAINING .90?94 SCHOOL REG/FIRE DEPT 60.00 34936 03/31/93 ANIMAL CARE EOUIPMEN 722 MTSC ANIMAL SUPPLIES 141.39 34937 03/31/93 J AND J DOG SUPPLIES 561 MISC ANIMAL SUPPLIES 57.00 34938 03/31/93 MONTICELLU ANIMAL CO 185 REIMS/MISC ANIMAL SUP 142.97 34939 03/31/93 CELLULAR ONE SSS CIVIL DEFENSE PW NE CH 33.24 34940 03/31/93 WRIGHT C4u41Y STATE 722 FICA W/H - K. TRIPPE 76.67 34940 03/31/93 WRIGHT C01INTY STATE 222 MEDICARE W/H - K. TRIP 17.98 94.65 sCi I 34941 03/3t/93 MINNESOTA HOMEWAPD 8 704 ANIMAL ADOPTIONS 840.00 C' 34942 01191/93 MONTICELLD ANIMAL CO 185 ANIMAL ADOPTIONS 336.00 34943 03/31/93 NORTHWEST MINNESOTA IS$ REO FEE/GARY ANDERSON 10.00 34944 03/31/99 MN DEPAPT OF NATURAL 118 WATERCRAFT TITLES 711.00 34945 03/31/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 119 WATERCRAFT/SHOW/ATV R 230.00 GENERAL CHECKING TOTAL 749.25 G RPC FIPJAf+•.IAL SYSTEM 04/01/93 14144/16 WARRANT DATE VENDOR - GENERAL IHECKiNG 34946 04/02/93 HATCH -PETERSON SALES 34947 04/02/93 HERMES/JERR V 34948 04/07/93 HOLIDAY CREC)IT OFFIC 34049 04/02/93 KRAEMER/WAN OA 34950 04/02/93 LEONARD I14C /A M 34951 04/02/93 MAC4UEEN EOlUIPMENT I 34952 04/02/99 MASTEPING COMPUTERS 34953 04/02/93 MINN PCILLUT ION CONTR 34954 04/0?793 MINN STATE FiPE CHIE 349SS 04/02/93 MN PUS EMPLOY 4-ABOR 34956 04/07/93 MONIICELLO ANIMAL CO 34957 04/02/93 MONTICELLO BAKERY 0 34959 04/07/93 MONTICELLO PAPER 1 E 14959 04/02/93 MONTICELLO SENIOR CI 34960 04/02/93 O.E.I. 6USINE6$ FORM 34961 04/02/93 PAGE LINK 36961 04/07/93 PAGE LINK 34961 04/02/93 PAGE LINK 34901 04/02/93 PAGE LINK 34961 04/02/93 PACE LINT( 349C1 04/02/93 PAGE LINK 34961 04/02/93 PAGE LINK 16961 04/07/93 PAGE LINK 34967 04/02/93 PETER$EN'$ MONY Folk* 14962 04/02/93 PROFE$tlovikL $E?RVICE 14964 00/92/63 RILI"Lt COOPORATION C3490% 04/02/93 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO. 1 s Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 94 TRAFFIC CONES/STREETS 274.97 81 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50 95 GAS/FIRE DEPT 65.75 356 TRAVEL EXPENSE 79.26 723 STREET SUPPLIES 242.51 ick E©UIP REPAIR DARTS/ST 646.32 90296 PEG FEE/COMPUTER CLAS 198.00 127 ANNUAL PERMIT FEE/WWT 410.00 493 MEMO(PSHIP DUES/FIRE 0 65.00 42) MEMBERSHtP DUES 41.66 . 186 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1.100.00 699 CIVIL DEFENSE SUPPLIES 13.00 724 PAPER SUPPLIES/C HAIL 47.66 139 MONTHLY CON TRIG UTEO 2.633.33 156 COPY MCH PAPER/C HALL 212.73 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARSTS 71.30 703 PAGER CHARGCS 24.50 703 PAGER CHAR6E3 71.30 703 PAOER CHARGE$ 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 703 PAGER CHARGll$ 21.10 171.60 >•�' 165 VIM REPAIR PART$/$TREE 10.91 115 WWTP CONTRACT PAYM 12.994.92 119 OFFICE SUPPLIES/C MALL 37.10 496 SOAP/PARK 0101 61.06 8RC FINAUCIAL SYSTEM 04/01/93 14:44:16 ` AIARRANT DATE VENOC+A GENERAL CHECKING 34966 04/02/93 UNOCAL 34967 04/02/93 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 34967 04/02/93 VASKO RUSSISH REMOVA 34968 04/02/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 34968 04/02/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 34968 04/07/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOilO 34968 04/02/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 34968 04/02/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AU0I70 34969 04/07/93 WRIGHT COUNTY JOURNA 34970 04/02/93 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement JournAl DESCPIPTION AMOUNT 213 GAS/FIRE DEPT 26.84 S24 MARCH GAQ8AGE CONTR 7.038.S6 $74 SALES TAX/GAPSAGE CON 457.S1 7.496.07 219 PROP TAXES/ELDERLY PRO 44.87 219 COLE PROPERTY TAXES 811.77 219 WWTP RENTAL PROP TAXE 375.65 219 PROP TAxEb/IXI 1/7I► 1 49.70 219 PROPERTY TAXES/PARKS 77.28 1.159.27 ?33 W C JOURNAL PPESS SUE 20.00 S12 UTILITIES/STREET LIGHTS 8.69 TOTAL 48.387.99 is,, 1 N BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/07/93 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 56 MISC PROF SERVICES/WAT 73.00 34975 04/06/93 13:44:38 56 CHEMICALS/WATER DEP 1.601.59 Disbursement Journal iARRANT DATE VENDOR 1.674.6r •. 34976 OESCPIPIION AMOUNT i 126 GENERAL CHECKING 34977 04/01/93 J M OIL COMPANY 95 OIL/FIRE DEPT 34971 04/07/93 ARA CORY REFRESHMENT JOHNSON/MIKE 408 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 84.00 34972 04/07/93 RIFFS, INC. MILEAGE EXPENSE 395 LATRINE RENTAL 70."6 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 780.79 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 87.49 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 47.68 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 27.43 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER IELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 67.42 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEF-HON 24 PHONE CHARGES 47.03 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 13.50 34973 04/01/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 108.19 34973 04/07/93 BRIOGEWATER IELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 37.31 34973 04/07/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 24 PHONE CHARGES 19.06 1.235.90 wC 34974 04/07/93 D & K REFUSE RECYCLI 811 RECYCLING CONTRACT 2.221.20 34975 04/07/93 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 56 MISC PROF SERVICES/WAT 73.00 34975 04/07/93 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 56 CHEMICALS/WATER DEP 1.601.59 1.674.6r •. 34976 04/07/93 HAALAND/WOODY 126 TRAVEL EXPENSE/FIRE D 139.00 34977 04/01/93 J M OIL COMPANY 95 OIL/FIRE DEPT 20.96 34978 04/01/93 JOHNSON/MIKE 125 TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINA 244.44 34919 04/07/93 KORDPCHAK/OLIVIE 97 MILEAGE EXPENSE 51.51 34980 04/07/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 252.94 34980 04/07/93 MIOWESI GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 46.04 34980 04/07/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 77.59 14980 04/07/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 64.65 34980 04/07/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 345.19 14980 04/07/93 MIDWE ST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 2.072.43 2.850.64 •r 34981 04/07/93 MINNESOTA STATE TREA 262 OLD PERMIT SURCHARGE 317.09 34982 04/07/93 MONTICELLO CLINIC 301 PHYSICAL/JOHN MIOENDO 125.00 34983 04/07/93 O'NEILL/JEFF 161 TRAVEL EXPENSE 65.16 44983 04/01/9) O'NEILL/JEFF 101 RE IMO/OFFICE SUPPLIES 16.90 12.14 1( 34784 04/01/93 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 11S mFV• 1.260.)S i L' BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/06/93 13:44:38 dARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 34985 04/07/93 TAYLOR LAND SURVEYOR GENERAL CHECKING 11 Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C 203 PROF SERV/MAPS PRINTE 177.50 TOTAL 16.553.58 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/08/93 09:12:57 .RRAHT DATE VENDOR r:FNFpAI_ CHECWiN( 34986 04/07/93 MAUS/XENNETH 34987 04/07/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 34987 04/07/93 ORE14TESON CONSTRUCTI 34988 04/07/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 34988 04/07/93 BRENTESON CONSTRUCTI GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal OESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL 109 TRAVEL EXPENSE 69.50 119 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 435.00 435 CORRECT VENDOR 435.000R 0.00 *CH 118 WATERCRAFT TITLE 120.00 435 CORRECT VENDOR 1?0.000R 0.00 sC TOTAL 69.50 r� BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/07/93 09:11:11 .ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 34987 04/08/93 SRENTESON CONSTRUCTI 34988 04/08/93 BRENTESON CONSTRUCTI 34989 04/19/93 AOAM'S PEST CONTROL 34990 04/19/93 ANIMAL CARE EQUIPMEN 34991 04/19/93 BERGSTROM'S LAWN & G 34992 04/19/93 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/03 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34993 04/19/93 COAST TO COAST 34994 04/19/93 COMMUNICATION AUDITO 34995 04/19/93 HERMES/JERRY 34996 04/19/93 INDUSTRIAL MAINT. SU 34991 04/19/93 KEN ANDERSON TRUCKIN 34998 04/19/93 MAUS FOODS 34998 04/19/93 MAUS FOODS 34998 04/19/93 MAUS FOODS 34999 06/19/93 MCDOWALL COMPANY 35000 04/19/93 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 35001 04/19/93 MONTICELLO HOUSING & ISOOT 04/19/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 35002 04/19/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Cl 435 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 435.00 435 WATERCRAFT TITLE 1?0.00 3 PEST CONTROL/LIBRARY 46.66 722 ANIMAL SUPPLIES 98.40 441 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARKS 44.37 29 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/SN 219.92 35 MISC SUPPLIES/STREETS 45.50 3S MISC SUPPLIES/CITY HALL 1.02 35 FAUCET REPAIRS/CITY HA 11.68 35 SUPPLIES/ANIMAL CONTROL 8.07 35 ANTIFREEZE/FIRE DEPT 17.00 35 CLEANING SUP/LIBRARY 20.39 35 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP & GAR 14.68 3S MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP & G 10.03 35 MISC SUPPLIES/MATER 37.76 35 MISC SUPPLIES/FIRE DEPT 5.52 35 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/STR 37.67 209.32 38 REPAIR FUSE/FIRE DEPT 18.79 81 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50 514 SHOP & GAR SUPPLIES 327.16 691 PROF SERV/ANIMAL CONTR 79.88 108 CLEANING SUP/LIBRARY 10.89 109 CLEANING UP/ANIMAL CON 60.40 106 CITY HALL SUPPLIES $2.08 123.31 111 REPAIR WATER COOLER/LI 91.00 165 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1.100.00 416 STREET SUPPLIES 4.57 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/SEWER 16.68 136 CITY HALL OFFICE SUP 301.60 317.45 •CH BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/07/93 09111;11 %BRANT DATE VENDOR Lit NERAL %;NECKING 35003 04/19/93 MONTICELLO PRINTING 35003 04/19/93 MONTICELLO PRINTING 35004 04/19/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35004 04/19/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35004 04/19/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35004 04/19/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35005 04/19/93 NOkfHWEST ASSOC CONS 35006 04/19/93 OLSON B SONS ELECTRI 35006 04/19/93 OLSON 4 SONS ELECTRI 35006 04/19/03 OLSON is SONS ELECTRI 35007 04/19/93 ORR-SC HELEN-MAYERON 35008 04/19/93 PLUMBEPV-PURCELI'S P 15008 04/19/93 PLUMBERV-PURCELL'S P 35009 04/19/93 PREUSSE'S CLEANING S 35009 04/19/93 PREUSSE'S CLEANING S 35010 04/19/93 OUINLAN PUBLISHING C 35011 04/10/93 RACO MANUFACTURING C 35011 04/10/93 RACO MANUFACTURING C 35017 04/18/93 SAFETV-KIEEN CORP. 35013 04/19/93 ST.CLO00 FIRE EQUIPM IS013 04/19/93 ST.CLO00 FIRE EQUIPM 35014 04/10/03 WRIGHT COUNTY AVOITO 36014 04/19/03 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 35014 04/19/83 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 35015 04/18/93 V.M.0 A. OF 14IN14EAPO GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLF 137 CITU HALL OFFICE SUP 2.56 137 PRINTED CARDS/ECON DEV 54.69 57. ?b 140 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 933.30 140 MOTOR VEHICLE NEW HOUR 50.40 140 HELP WANTED/PARKS DEPT 88.20 140 BLD PERMIT INFO 126.00 1.191.90 550 PLAN & 70N PROF SERVIC 68.85 160 REPAIR COMPRESSOR/FIR 100.00 160 REPAID LITES/CITY HALL 71.54 160 REPAIR BREAKER/PARKS B 79.86 251.40 162 ENG FEES 2.000.36 251 OLD REPAIR SUP/PAPKS 226.1.4 251 FAUCET REPAIR/CITY HAL 55.57 ?82.01 173 CITY HALL CLEANING CO 400.00 173 FIRE HALL CLEANING CON 50.00 450.00 177 SUBSCRIPT ION/BLD INSP 79.101 727 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/MAT 15.00 727 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/SEW 15.00 30.00 184 MTC AGRMT/STREETS 65.50 242 SERVICE FIRE EKTINQ/ST 92.00 242 SERVICE FIRE EKTINQ/SH 59.64 1$1. 64 210 SHERIFF'S CONTRACT 71.793.00 210 AWL LANO FILL CH 10.458.39 219 AUOIT VEPIFICAIION 75.00 32.276.39 724 APRIL CONTRACT PYMT 675.00 TOTAL 41.880.24 •CHF *CME '(HE sCHE' •0HL *CME •CNE *-:HF BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/09/93 07:29:06 .'ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 35016 04/19/93 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOD 35016 04/19/93 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOD 35017 04/19/93 BRAUN INTERTEC ENVIO 35017 04/19/93 BRAUN INTERTEC ENVIO 35018 04/19/93 CENTRAL MCGOWAN. INC 35019 04/19/93 COPY OUPLCATING PROD 35020 04/19/93 DYNA SYSTEMS 35021 04/19/93 GOPHER STATE ONE CAL 35022 04/19/93 HOGLUND COACH LINES 35023 04/19/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35023 04/19/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35023 04/19/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35023 04/19/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35024 04/19/93 MACGUEEN EQUIPMENT I 35025 04/19/93 MINNESOTA BUILDING 0 35026 04/19/93 MINNESOTA DEPART OF 35027 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 15077 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35027 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35027 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35027 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING, PAR 35027 04/19/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35078 04/19/93 UNI TOG RENTAL SERVIC 35028 04/19/93 UNI TOG RENTAL SERVIC 35028 04/19/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35026 04/18/83 UNI TOG RENTAL SERVIC 3b078 04/19/93 LINITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35028 04/19/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 15029 04/19/93 VISION ENERGY Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLI 260 OVERHEAD DOOR WINDOWS 110.34 260 OVERHEAD DOOR WINDOWS 110.34 220.68 638 ENG FEES/CARD HILLS 1.200.00 638 ENG FEES/7TH 8 LOCUST 630.00 1.830.00 30 SHOP Q GARAGE SUPPLIE 285.82 41 COPY MCH MTC/LIBRARY 114.30 50 SHOP b GARAGE SUPPLIE 226.83 69 PROF SERVICES/MATER DE 15.00 483 HEARTLAND EXPRESS C 5.465.11 327 MILEAGE FXPENSE 8.31 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 2.79 321 MILEAGE EXPENSE 2.79 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 2.79 16.74 104 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/ST 189.02 129 REG FEE/GARY ANDERSON 15.00 119 WATER SERVICE CONN 1.886.30 144 STREET SUPPLIES 28.50 144 OIL/SHOO 8 GARAGE 2.63 144 MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP 1 G 35.12 144 VEH REPAIR PARTS/STRE 278.44 144 MISC SUPPLIES/MATER 11.06 144 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARKS 53.21 408.96 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 14.16 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 14.16 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 12.80 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 12.80 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 68.14 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 34.06 156.12 S18 STREET SUPPLIES 482.28 1~030 04/18/93 VOLLBRECHT/ROIONET 116 TRAVEL EXP(NSF/FIR( 0 203.78 0CHI *C11. •CI+I •CHI PCHE E1kC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/15/93 14 :06: 01 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENEAAL CHECKING 35031 04/14/93 MINNESOTA DEPART OF 35031 04/14/93 MINNESOTA DEPART OF 35031 04/14/93 MINNESOTA DEPART OF 35032 04/14/93 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL LIF 35032 04/14/93 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL LIF 35033 04/14/93 NORTHEfN STATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES ROWE 35033 04/14/03 NORTHERN STAPES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN SIATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NOP THERN STATES ROWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 35033 04/14/93 NORTHERN STATES ROWE 1 35034 04/14/93 U.S. POSTMASTER 35035 04/14/93 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 35036 04/14/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35037 04 / 14 /93 MN DF PART OF NATURAL 35038 04/16/93 A 1 6 T INFO SYSTEMS 35039 04/18/93 AUDIO -, I ATIONS 35040 04/16/93 BUSINESS O(VELOPMENT 3SO41 04/18/93 OARLEY 1 CO./W. S. 35041 04/16/9) OARLEY 6 CO./W. S. 35042 04/18/99 OARTNELL CO*PORATION 3SO43 04/16/93 OTC FIRE RESCUE TRAI 35044 04/18/93 EMERGENCY APPARATUS 35045 04/16/1) FIRE ENGINEERING l 15048 04/18/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 35046 04/16/9) HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 3 504 6 06/16/91 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL i 119 SALES TAX/1ST QUARTER 676.54 119 SALES TAX/1ST QUARTER 689.59 119 SALES TAX/IST QUARTER 63.40 1.429.53 +CH. 174 KEITH TRIPPE INS PREM 309.02 174 KEITH TRIPPE INS PREM 215.76 524.78 -Chi 148 UTIL ITIES 2.487.17 148 UTIL ITIES 231.24 148 UrIL ITIES 8.624.00 148 UTIL ITIES 92.70 148 UTIL ITIES 349.9? 148 UTIL ITIES 14.65 148 UTILITIES 416.58 148 UTILITIES 254.75 148 UTILITIES 1.17?.48 146 UTIL ITIES 672.37 12.315.66 OCHe 210 POST OFFICE BOX RENTAL 31.50 243 AFM• 250.00 118 WATERCRAFT TITLE 93.00 116 WATE RCQAFT/SNOW/ATV R 413.00 IS FIRE PHONE CHARGES 73.18 17 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/FIR 78.81 26 PROF SERV/CUSTOM CA 3.850.00 231 HOSES/WATER DEPT 110.04 231 HOSES/StWER COLLECTIO 265.00 435.04 651 SUBSCRIPTION/CITY HAL 221.15 528 TRAVEL EXPENSE/FIRE 0E 80.00 460 VEM MTC/FIRE DEPT 111.66 SI SUISCRIPTION/FIRE DEPT 23.50 19 VEH REPAIR PARTS/STREf 68.40 18 MI6C SU►PLIES/SHOP 8 G 46.21 70 MISC SUPPLIES/STREETS 1S.8? ESRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/15/93 14:06:01 .ARRANT DATE VENDOR tie NEkAL LHtl.K1Nb 35046 04/16/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 35046 04/16/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 35046 04/16/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 35046 04/16/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 35046 04/16/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLI 78 MTC OF VEHICLES/FIRE 0 48.02 78 SMALL TOOLS/FIRE DEPT 52.50 78 EQUIP PEPAIR PARTS/SEW 12.91 78 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/5TR 16.86 78 TPANSMISSION OIL/STREE 81.28 340.76 'L1, 35047 04/16/93 HENRY i ASSOCIATES 545 COLO PATCH/STREET DEP 483.68 3504" 04/16/93 HUbLUNO TRANSPOkTATI 84 VEHICLE MTC/FIRE DEPT 481.06 35048 04/16/93 HOGLUND TRANSPORTATI 84 MISC SHOP 6 GAR SUPPL 127.80 608.86 OC.H1 35049 04/16/93 MACK/ROGER 471 TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINAR 29.68 35050 04/16/93 SHUMAN/CATHY 191 TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINAR 42.83 35050 04/16/93 SHUMAN/CATHY 191 REIMS/SUBSCRIPTION/CO 103.95 146.78 Si Hs 35051 04/16/93 SOUTHAM BUSINESS COM 644 LEGAL PU8/C HILLS 3R0 233.10 35052 04/16/93 VOLLSRECHT/ROONEY 728 TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINAR 94.00 35053 04/16/93 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO 670 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT 121.36 35054 04/16/93 WRIGHT COUNTY MAYOR' 220 1993 MAYORS ODES 150.00 GENERAL CHECKING TOTAL 22.271.84 8F,( FINANCIAL SYSTEM 03/31/03 13;SS :50 ARRANT DATE VENDOR LIQUOk FUNU 16813 03/30/93 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 16013 03/30/9) £At1lE WINE COMPANY 16814 03/30/93-GRIGGS. COOPER i CON 16916 03%30/93 OAVMJR HAMCO 16918 03/30/93 JOHNSOM EROS WHOLFSA 16817 03/30/93 GPIGGS. COOPER i COM 18818 03/30/93 PHILLIPS 8 SONS CO/E 16818 03/30/93 PHILLIPS 8 SONS CO/E Disbursement .:ournal Of SCRIPT ION AMOUNT CLA 800012 WINE PURCr4ASE 1.335.12 800012 MISC ITFMS FOR RESALE' 16^.87 1.497.99 800019 LIQUOR PURCHASE 5.297.56 900005 NISC SUPPLIES 90.59 800022 WINE PURCHASE 454.15 800019 LIQUOR PURCHASE 80.34 900037 WINE PURCHAS $96.95 900037 LIQUOR PURCHASE 709.67 1.308.62 466.73 1 .044.03 1.510.26 12.27 3.121.29 SSA . 12 98.90 842.97 1.947.51 399.09 7.747.39 18819 03/30/99 QUALITY WINE i SPIRT 800040 WINE PURCHASE 16819 03/30/93 QUALITY WINE 8 SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURMCASE 16820 03/30/93 QUALITY WINE i SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE ( `'16871 03/30/93 GRIGGS. COOPER i COM 900018 LIOUOR PURCMASt 16922 03/30/93 FABLE WINE COMPANY 900012 WINE PURCHASE 1892? 03/30/9) EAGLE WINE COMPANY 900017 WINE PURCHASE 10973 07/30/93 JOHNSON 91ROS WHOLESA 900012 WINE PURCHASE 10023 03/30/97 JOHNSON SRO$ WHGLESA 900022 L MDR P 1,AU0 I tOTAI 16.319.70 RC Hr i 1 sCH »CH - E11`C FINANCIAL SYSTEM ; 94/01/93 14:45:01 Disbursement Journal 7 WARRANT DATE VENDOR OESCPIPTION AMOUNT CLO LIQUOR tUNU 16824 06/02/93 6EPNICK'S PEPSI COLA 800001 POP PUeCHASE 217.00 10828 04/02/93 COAST rO COAST 800004 SUPPLIES 33.84 16826 04/07/93 DAY 01614160TING COM 800010 BEER PUQCHASE 752.50 16827 04/02/03 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 BEER PURCHASE 2.671.0S 16627 04/02/93 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 38.68 2.709.10 *CHI 16828 04/02/93 FLESCH'S PAPER SERVI 800110 PAPER BAGS 159.72 1$029 04/02/93 8 3 K SERVICE 800129 MTC OF SLD/RUG MATS 59.79 1*030 04/0?/93 GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1 900019 BEEP PURCHASE 8.862.75 10831 04/02/93 HOME JUICE 800136 JUICE FOR RESALE 29.66 16832 04/02/93 JUDE CANDY 6 TOBACCO 000021 CIGS AND CIGARS 279.06 16932 04/02/93 JUDE CANDY 8 TOBACCO 000021 LiOUOR.STORE SUPPLIES 179.60 408.66 �C+1 r 16633 04/02/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 800028 UTILITIES 200.06 16834 04/02/93 NORIHERN STATES POWE 000035 UTILITIES 176.39 18835 04/02/93 PHILLIPS * SONS CO/E 000037 LIGUOR PURCHASE 890.09 16835 04/07/93 PHILLIPS • SOMS CO/E 000011 WINE PURCHASE 387.71 1.271.00 oCi' 16836 04/02/93 QUALITY WINE 8 SPIRT 000040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.916.90 15837 0k/02/93 ROW'S ICE COMPANY 900041 ICE PURCHASE 274.32 18919 04/02/91 ST. CLOUD RESTAURAMT 800045 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 42.48 +9039 06/02/93 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 900048 BEER PURCHASE 10.1104.7s 16840 04/09/91 VIKING COCA-COLA 801 800051 000 PURCHASE 460.9% 180k1 01k/01/91 MRIONT COUNTY 'MAS/ 000116 SIDEWALK 100 000J/TAME 01.39 II 1856? 04/02/15 VRIOMT WAY SHOPPER 000106 ADVERTISING 86.2% I kloom iy" TOTAL 39.090.19 A 8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/06/93 13:43:55 Disbursement Journal ARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLA LIQUOR FUND 16843 04/06/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 800002 PHONE CHARGES 96.36 16844 04/06/93 OAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800009 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 21.00 16844 04/06/93 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800009 BEER PURCHASE 17.816.85 17.837.85 OCH. 16845 04/06/93 DIAMOND CLEAR ICE 800148 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 4?.50 16845 04/06/93 DIAMOND CLEAR ICE 800148 ICE FOR SALES 204.35 246.85 *CHt 16846 04/06/93 DRIVERS LICENSE GUID 800013 SUBSCRIPTION 19.45 16847 04/06/93 JOHNSON BP,OS WHOLESA 8000?? WINE PUPCHASE 553.18 16848 04/06/93 MAUS FOODS 8000?7 MISC SUPPLIES 10.84 16849 04/06/93 MCOOWALL COMPANY 800065 REPAID. COOLER 126.44 16850 04/06/93 MINN DEPARTMENT OF R 800006 SALES TAX FOR MARCH 9.064.30 • 16851 04/06/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 800031 OFFICE SUPPLIES 2.11 16852 04/06/93 14ONTICELLO PRINFING 800057 MISC FORMS PRINTED $2.93 16853 04/06/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 600032 MONTICELLO TIMES SUBSC 74.00 16853 04/06/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 800032 ADVERTISING 140.15 764.15 RCHi 18854 04/06/93 OLSON R SONS ELECTRI 800036 MTC OF OL0 119.00 110UOR FUND TOTAL 28.393.56 E.RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 04/12/93 14:00:23 .ARRANT DATE VENDOR LIQUOR FUND 16855 04/12/93 EAGLE MINE COMPANY 16855 04/12/93 EAGLE VINE COMPANY 16856 04/12/93 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM 16856 04/12/93 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLA 800012 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 354.37 800012 VINE PURCHASE 1.391.01 1.745.38 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 3.332.55 800018 MINE PURCHASE 203.95 3.536.50 16857 04/12/93 GTE DIRECTORIES SERV 800126 ADVERTISING 16858 04/12/93 JOHNSON BROS VHOLESA 800022 VINE PURCHASE 16858 04/12/93 JOHNSON BROS VHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 16859 04/12/93 PAUSIIS & SONS 800103 VINE PURCHASE 16860 04/12/93 QUALITY VINE & SPIRI 800040 VINE PURCHASE 16860 04/12/93 011AIITV VINF & °•PIPI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1(,661 04/12/93 U S VEST COMMUNICATI 800093 ADVERTISING LIQUOR FUND TOTAL 'CHE *CHf 32.00 1,156.77 972.83 2.129.60 *CH, 653.90 291.80 2.122.51 2.414.31 *(,H1 74.60 10.536.29 COUNCIL UPDATE April 22, 1993 Update on Cardinal Hills 3rd Addition development agreement. W.C.I City staff proposes to make two changes to the development agreement unless directed otherwise by Council. Please review for detail. As you recall, at the previous rneeting Council approved the development agreement for phase III of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Tom Holthaus was in attendance at the meeting and indicated at that time that he had no problems with the development agreement; however, since then he has taken a closer look at the document and found one provision that he would like amended. Specifically, the agreement requires that a letter of credit be provided to cover the cost to install two trees in the front yard area of each lot. Holthaus has indicated that this provision is not necessary because the City can withhold occupancy until tree plantings have occurred. During winter months when tree planting is not possible, the City can require establishment of an escrow fund which covers the cost to plant the trees when spring arrives. Holthaus requested that the development agreement be adjusted accordingly. I have reviewed this request with Paul Weingarden. Weingarden has indicated that he is comfortable with the concept of withholding occupancy until the tree planting requirement is satisfied; therefore, from a staff standpoint, we feel this is a reasonable request made by the developer and, therefore, we have taken the liberty to adjust the agreement accordingly. In addition, the developer requests that Council again allow the letter of credit to be reduced from 40'7e. ($194,996) of the project cost to 30% ($146,246). The developer agrees to pity off assessments on a 2 to 1 ratio under the 30% alternative. As you recall, Council provided this alternative in the previous development agreement. No problems resulted. See attached meeting minute excerpt for detail on action taken in May of 1992. If you are not comfortable with the proposed adjustment to the development agreement, please let, us know, and the item will be placed on the agenda for formal consideration. If you should have any questions, please give a me a call. Council Minutes - 5/26/92 Consideration of adopting development agreement governinq installation of public improvements with phase II of the Cardinal Hills residential subdivision. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that at the previous meeting Council was informed that the developers were in position to provide the financial securities with phase II using the same formula as was followed with the phase I development agreement. The phase I formula, when applied to phase II, results in the need for a letter of credit in the amount of $84,000 for site grading, $5,000 for final grading, and $173,000 to cover 408 of the cost of the public improvements. In addition, the phase I agreement, with every lot that is sold, the developer will pay 1.5 times the cost per lot to install the public improvements. It now appears that due to lending limits imposed on local banks by federal regulatory agencies, the developer is not quite able to provide the tutdl amount in letters of credit as required. Instead, the developers have proposed to provide the grading letters of credit as proposed ($84,000 and $5,000) and 30% of the cost to construct the public improvements. In exchange for the reduction in the public improvement letters of credit, the developers will pay the City an amount equal to 2 times the cost per lot to install the public improvements with every lot that is sold. The developers have indicated that the current homes under construction will soon close, and the money collected from the sales will enable them to increase the letter of credit from 30% to 40%. According to the development agreement, if the developer elects to increase the security from 30% to 401, the City will go back to the original deal whereby the City will release a lot after an amount equal to 1.5 times the per -lot construction cost is paid. Clint Herbst noted that obtaining assessment payment for two lots for every lot that is sold is acceptable in exchange for a reduction in the letter of credit requirement. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Dan Blonigen to adopt the development agreement as prepared. Motion carried unanimously. INFORMATIONAL ITEM April 23, 1993 By 011ie Koropchak This, a second report, is prepared to inform the City Council on the progress of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's (HRA) Goal: To serve as a facilitator and to investigate the need for subsidized or market rate congregate or assisted -living senior housing. At the April HRA meeting, the HRA passed a motion authorizing Patricia McCullough, Health Planning & Management Resources, Inc. (HP&MR), to prepare a senior housing market feasibility analysis. The analysis must meet both the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Farmers Home Administration (PmHA) funding application requirements. The congregate and assisted -living housing study will cover the approximate geographic area served by the local health providers. The HRA action demonstrates community support of the project and allows for a timely completion of the market study which is essential to meet 1993 funding application deadlines. The Proposal for Consulting Assistance was prepared by HP&MR and executed by the Monticello HRA and HP&MR on April 19, 1993. Phase I of the market study Is anticipated to be completed In six to eight weeks. Previously, the City Council was informed that Developer "A" made a senior housing concept presentation to the NRA and the HRA was encouraged by its results. Developer "B" desires to make a concept presentation to the NRA after completion of the market analysis. Council will be invited to the presentation. The completed analysis will lend assistance to the site selection. Site selection is one of the highest -ranked scoring components of a HUD and FmHA funding application. The application process is very competitive. At this time, site options have been discussed on a preliminary basis only.