City Council Agenda Packet 03-28-1994MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, March 14, 1994 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Patty Olsen
Members Absent: None
2. Consideration of anoroval of minutes of the regular meeting held February 28. 1994.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve the meeting minutes as submitted. Motion carried
unanimously.
4. Public Hearine--Consideration of adontine resolution relating to the modification by
the Housing and Redevelooment Authority of the Redeveloument Plan for
Redevelonment Proiect No. 1, the modification of the plans for Tax Increment
Financing Districts No. 1-1 through 1-15, and the establishment of Tax Increment
Financing District No. 1-16 and adoption of its plan (Polvcast Manufacturing Inc.)
Mayor Maus opened the public hearing.
Economic Development Director 011ie Koropchak described the plan for TIF District
1.16, which has been established to support the development of the Polycast
Manufacturing facility. In her report, she noted that the TIF plan calls for land
acquisition in the amount of $55,000; administration and professional services.
$15,000; capitalized interest, $8,365; and discount, $1,635; which results in a total
budget amount of $80,000. Koropchak went on to outline the development obligations
of the Schultz properties with regard to construction requirements. Under the
development agreement, Polycast will be constructing a 16,640 sq ]l office
manufacturing facility. It will he completed in 1994 and fully assessable on January
2, 1995. The minimum estimated market value of the structure has been agreed
upon and must equal $400,000.
Mayor Maus closed the public hearing.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle
to adopt the resolution relating to modification by the HRA of the Redevelopment
Plan relating to Redevelopment Project No. 1, modification of the TIF plans relating
to TIF Districts 1-1 through 1-15, and the establishment of TIF District No. 1-16, all
located within Redevelopment Project No. 1, and the approval of the TIF plans
relating thereto. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 94-8.
5. Public hearing on vrouosed increases in retail license fees for non-intoxicatine and
intoxicat.inu liouor licenses.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that it's been four years since the City's
licenses pertaining to beer, wine, on -sale, and off -sale liquor have been adjusted. The
Page 1 I . J
Council Minutes - 3/14/94
last time the fees were increased was in 1990. It was recommended at that time that
the City consider more frequent adjustments in smaller amounts rather than waiting
long periods and then requesting larger increases. Wolfsteller went on to review
Monticello's fees as compared to other communities.
Mayor Maus opened the public hearing.
Patty Olsen noted that the fees charged by Monticello appear to be average as
compared to what other cities charge; therefore, she did not see a big reason to
support an increase. Ken Maus noted that he would support allowing the fees to
remain the same under the condition that the fee structure is reviewed annually.
Councilmember Anderson stated that the City should require small increases and
that it would be reasonable to require a small increase at this time.
Mayor Maus closed the public hearing.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Patty Olsen to
make no changes to the current retail license fees for non -intoxicating and
intoxicating liquor licenses. Voting in favor of the motion: Brad Fyle, Patty Olsen,
Ken Maus. Opposed: Clint Herbst, Shirley Anderson.
Public hearine for the issuance of on -sale liquor license for a restaurant in the Sixth
Street Annex mall.
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator, reported that prior to issuing an on -sale liquor
license, the City Council is required to hold a public hearing to receive input from the
public concerning any license application. Wolfsteller went on to note that he had
Wright County Sheriffs Department conduct a background investigation on the
proprietor. The background check was positive. There is nothing in the applicant's
background that indicates we should consider denial of this request.
Wolfsteller mentioned that the proposal to allow on -sale liquor sales at this location
meets the minimum requirements of our ordinance. He noted, however, that there
appears to be an inconsistency in our ordinance in that an establishment holding a
3.2 beer license requires a 1,000 ft separation from the nearest church, whereas an
establishment holding a liquor license does not require such a wide separation.
Wolfsteller mentioned that perhaps the ordinance needs to be reviewed closely for
inconsistencies that could have been created through piecemeal updates of the
ordinance over time.
Shirley Anderson requested that the City Administrator thoroughly review the
ordinance and submit revisions for Council review if necessary.
There being no comments from the public regarding the issuance of the on -sale liquor
license for a restaurant in the Sixth Street Annex mall, the public hearing was closed.
Page 2
Council Minutes - 3/14/94
A motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded by Shirley Anderson to grant
approval of the issuance of an on -sale license to Mr. John Purmort for his restaurant
in the Sixth Street Annex mall. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of confirming 1994 Board of Review date and acceptance of Assessor's
summary report.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint
Herbst to accept the Assessor's summary report and schedule the Board of Review
meeting for Thursday, May 5, at 7 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
8. Consideration of a conditional use permit allowing open and outdoor storage. and
consideration of a parkine lot and drive aisle conditional use permit in an I-2 (heavv
industrial) zone. Anolicant. Sunnv Fresh Fonds.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that Sunny Fresh Foods is proposing to
expand the company's meeting and production facilities. In conjunction with the
proposed expansion, Sunny Fresh will be upgrading the site to meet current city
standards. In order to meet existing standards, Sunny Fresh will need to acquire a
conditional use permit which would allow a reduction in certain standard driveway
requirements, and Sunny Fresh needs a conditional use permit allowing outside
storage. O'Neill went on to review the proposed expansion, parking configuration,
landscaping plan, and method of screening outside storage.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to approve the conditional use permit allowing outside storage and to
approve a conditional use permit allowing a reduction in the drive aisle parking
requirements based on the finding that the conditional use permits are consistent
with the character and geography of the I-2 zoning district designation and will not
result in a depreciation in adjoining land values. As a requirement of the conditional
use permit, Sunny Fresh Foods is requested to provide a written agreement between
the Methodist Church congregation and Sunny Fresh Foods regarding common use of
certain drive areas. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of it conditional use permit agllowine open and outdoor storage, and
consideration of a parking lot and drive aisle conditional use permit in an I-1 (light
industrial) zone, Applicant, SMA Elevator.
Gary Anderson, Zoning Administrator, reported that SMA Elevator is proposing to
build a 54' x 80' addition to the existing building. In conjunction with this expansion,
according to ordinance it is required that the site meet existing requirements with
regard to screening of outside storage.
Council went on to review the outside storage area and discussed the screening
requirement. It was noted by staff that the screening requirement calls for screening
the view of the stored material from the public right-of-way. In recent cases, the
Planning Commission and City Council have interpreted this language to mean that
Page 3
Council Minutes - 3/14/94
the outside storage area needs to be enveloped by the screening fence in front and on
each end of the storage area and not limited to a screening fence on the right-of-way
side of the storage area.
It was noted in the discussion that the storage area on the Thomas Park Drive side of
the property is substantially lower than Thomas Park Drive; therefore, a screening
fence higher than 6 ft may be necessary to properly screen the materials stored. It
was, therefore, suggested that the fence :nay need to be higher than 6 ft or perhaps a
small berm could be constructed on the fence line with a 6 ft fence on top of the berm.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Patty Olsen to
approve the conditional use request to allow open and outdoor storage in an I-1 zone
and to approve the parking lot and drive aisle conditional use permit based on the
finding that the conditional use permits are consistent with the geography and the
character of the area, will not result in a depreciation of adjoining land values, and
are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Staff is directed to work with the
property owner to place the fence in a proper manner to allow for sufficient outside
storage area while screening the view of the stored materials from the public right-of-
way. Motion carried unanimously.
10. Consideration of amendment to Section 3-9: (E) of the zonine ordinance regulating
definition. size. number, and location of Dremise and product signs allowed within the
PIM. B-1. B-2. B-3. B4. 1.1, and 1-2 districts.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that Holiday Stationstores requests a pylon
sign and three premise identification signs. Currently ordinance allows one pylon
sign and one premise identification sign. O'Neill noted that originally Holiday
Stationstores had asked for a variance allowing two additional premise signs. The
Planning Commission rejected the variance request based on the finding that no
hardship exists justifying the variance. However, the Planning Commission felt that
the request was reasonable because Holiday Stationstores has frontage on three
public right-of-ways, and the total sign area of all the signs proposed was actually
less than what was allowed under current ordinance. Therefore, the Planning
Commission went forward by designing an ordinance amendment in response to
Holiday Stationstores' request. Under the amendment, Holiday Stationstores would
1.1,L allowed a premise sign for each street frontage that the parcel adjoins; however,
the combined sign area of all signs must not exceed the sign area allowed under the
present regulations.
The zoning ordinance also clarifies treatment of gas station canopies. Under current
ordinance, it is not clear if signs are to be allowed on gas station canopies. The
proposed ordinance would allow the allotment of wall sign area allowed to be placed
on the gas station canopy if so desired. O'Neill went on to review the Planner's
report, which noted that it is relatively common to allow service stations to place
premise signs on canopies.
Page 4
Council Minutes - 3/14/94
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Patty Olsen to
approve the zoning ordinance amendment as proposed based on the findings outlined
in the Planner's report. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 247.
11. Consideration of amendment to Section 3-2: (F) of the zoning ordinance regulating
placement of fences. The amendment would allow placement of fences on a nrooertv
line onlv with written aooroval from DroDertv owners affected.
Assistant Administrator O Neill reported that the purpose of the ordinance is to
utilize the City's regulatory authority to ensure proper placement of fences along
property lines. The need for the ordinance has been identified by Building Inspector
Gary Anderson. Anderson has noted that improper placement of fences and
associated neighbor conflicts occur about three times per year. The proposed
ordinance would be employed to resolve such conflicts. O'Neill noted that the City
Planner states that fence ordinances are in place in other communities, and they
appear to be working well to mitigate conflicts between neighbors. Finally, O Neill
informed Council that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the
ordinance. It was their view that the problem between neighbors relating to fences
should remain a civil matter to be worked out by property owners. City involvement
in regulating fence placement through a permitting process is an unneeded drain on
City staff resources needed elsewhere.
O'Neill went on to note that the proposed ordinance would require that fences be
placed 3 ft from the lot line unless permission by the neighbor is given to place it
closer to the lot line. The approval by the neighbor must consist of a written
document outlining terms and conditions associated with maintenance of the fence.
The document would be a recordable instrument that would bind the present and
future property owners of both properties affected by the fence.
Residents Tod Larson and Don Farnham both detailed situations where the proposed
ordinance would have prevented fence -related conflicts with their neighbors. They
expressed support for the adoption of the ordinance.
After discussion, a motion was made by Patty Olsen and seconded by Shirley
Anderson to adopt the proposed ordinance; however, the ordinance as proposed should
be modified to include a 2 -ft setback rather than a 3 -ft setback. Furthermore, for the
sake of efficiency, staff was directed to enforce the ordinance on a complaint basis.
Implementation of the ordinance through a permitting process is not advised at this
time. Voting in favor of the motion: ' Patty Olsen, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Ken
Maus. Opposed: Clint Herbst. SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 248.
Page 5
Council Minutes - 3114/94
12. Consideration of authorizine the soecifications for the purchase of a new oumoer and
rescue fire truck.
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator, reported that for the past three years, the Joint
Fire Board has been discussing the need for acquiring a new pumper truck. In
anticipation of the proposed purchase, the City has been budgeting $35,000 per year
for the past few years in anticipation of a replacement pumper costing approximately
$150,000. The cost has now escalated to $220,000, which means that the City would
need to budget an additional $80,000 in 1995 to cover the City's share of the cost.
Brad Fyle noted that the existing pumper is over 20 years old and is getting to be an
antique. The need for a new truck is evident.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Patty Olsen to
move forward on purchase of the fire truck. The deficiency to be paid using existing
capital funds. The City should replenish capital funds by continuing the $35,000
annual levy for each of three years after the truck has been delivered. Motion carried
unanimously.
13. Consideration of an aoolication for one-dav eambline license --Ducks Unlimited
Banquet.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle
to adopt a resolution approving issuance of the license. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 94-9.
14. Other matters.
A. Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested that the City Council consider
conducting a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the
Emmerich/Mein/Kjellberg rezoning proposal.
After discussion, a special meeting was called by the City Council for
Wednesday, March 30, at 6 p.m.
B. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed the City Council that the Parks
Commission is recommending a change to the adopted parks budget for 1994.
The change calls for an expenditure of $10,000 on the NSP softball fields for
various improvements, including:
1. Shelter
$ 5,000
2. Bleachers (2 sets)
$ 4,000
3. Dugouts - 6 chain link
$ 3,000
Dugouts - 2 block or wood
$ 1,000
4. Safety netting
$ 1,000
Page 6
Council Minutes - 3/14/94
5. Scoreboards - installation in field #4 $ 500
Addl scoreboard for field #1 $ 1,250
6. Playground - sandbox $ 0
TOTAL IMPROVEMENTS $15,750
O'Neill noted that the Parks Commission is recommending an expenditure on
the facility due to the fact that funds in the amount of $5,000 will be
contributed by the Baseball and Softball Association toward payment of the
associated costs. It was the view of the Parks Commission that changing the
budget made sense because the matching funds presented an opportunity for
the City to stretch its park dollars.
A general discussion ensued regarding the protocol for obtaining approvals for
budgeted expenditures. The entire Council agreed that the Parks Commission
is free to implement projects approved and budgeted during the previous year
with review and approval of the City Administrator.
Finally, it was the consensus of Council that the proposed expenditure of
$10,000 for NSP field improvements is acceptable and could be drawn from the
1994 parks budget.
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Page 7
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
4. Consideration of aonroval of the oreiiminary plat of the Eastwood
Knoll residential subdivision. ADDlieant. Citv of Monticello. W.O.I
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you know, Outlots C and D of Meadow Oak Estates are being platted in
conjunction with City acquisition 3f the property through a mortgage
foreclosure process. Planning Commission and City Council are asked to
review the preliminary plat of the site and consider its approval. Following
is a description of the plat followed by a review of certain issues that
deserve special attention.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
As you know, the original plan for this property under the PUD design
called for development in conjunction with a planned unit development.
Under the original proposal, 43 lots were to be developed following the
design on the attached pathway map. As you can see, the design
maximized the property in terms of lot density with little attention given to
integrating the subdivision design into the natural characteristics of the
property. The new plan for the area as outlined in the Eastwood Knoll
subdivision design is much more sensitive to the natural characteristics of
the property. It results in development of fewer lots; however, the lots that
result should have a much higher value due to preservation of trees and
minimization of impact caused by site grading.
STREET SYSTEM
The subdivision calls for two access points to the subdivision, one at
Meadow Oak Lane and one at Woodcrest Drive. Meadow Oak Lurie will be
the only method for exiting and entering the site until the Briar Oakes
development to the south is completed. Woodcrest Drive will he connected
to the Briar Oakes subdivision, which will allow Eastwood Knoll traffic to
access I IS through the Briar Oakes development. Conversely, traffic from
the Briar Oakes area will be allowed to access the County Road 75 right-of-
way via Meadow Oak Lane. This traffic pattern is consistent with the
original planned unit development; however, under the original plan, there
was another outlet to Meadow Oak Avenue via what is shown on the plat as
Oakwood Court.. Under the present plan, Oakwood Court is a cul-de-sac
and not it through street; therefore, all traffic from the neighborhood must
go through Meadow Oak Lane.
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
It should be noted that the length of Oakwood Court is 800 ft. Our general
guidelines state that cul-de-sacs should not exceed 600 ft. The extra
distance is mitigated by the fact that the lots are large, thereby resulting in
lower than normal lot density within the cul-de-sac. In addition, a
pedestrian outlet at the end of the cul-de-sac has been provided.
The subdivision is designed without a second outlet to Meadow Oak Lane to
add to the value and exclusivity of the lots on Oakwood Court. It is felt
that the added value created by establishing a cul-de-sac as proposed offsets
the negative impact of the additional traffic resulting along Meadow Oak
Lane.
In terms of street width and construction design, due to the fact that
Meadow Oak Lane and Woodcrest Drive will eventually become through
streets and because they incorporate the internal walkway system, they are
being constructed to a width of 36 ft. Eastwood Court and Blackwood Circle
are both being constructed to the width of 32 ft. Both circles will feature a
landscaped delineator in the middle of each circle. The delineator improves
the aesthetics of the circle without increasing maintenance. To further
illustrate this concept, I have taken a video of a similar design in the city of
Mahtomedi.
PARKS AND PATHWAY SYSTEM
In the design of the subdivision, a strong effort was made to integrate the
site into the original concept supporting the planned unit development. As
you can see, two pathways are proposed which link residents living within
Eastwood Court and Blackwood Circle to the future park to be developed at
Outlot A. These pathways also provide access to Outlot A for area residents
passing through the subdivision on their way from the Briar Oakes and Oak
Ridge neighborhoods. The Eastwood Knoll plan differs from the original
plan in that the primary way through the development uses on the public
right-of-way, whereas under the original plan it pathway extended along
rear lot lines.
Pathway construction plans do include development of the pathways
between lots leading from the cul-de-sacs to Outlot A. Planning
Commission and Council may wish to consider adding an additional
pathway segment extending along the southerly boundary (power line
casement) of the property to the park located at Outlot E. This pathway
would provide direct access to a park facility for residents living in this
area, which could improve the value and marketability of the property. As
you can see on the attached plan, this segment is included in the overall
Council Agenda - 3128194
pathway plan for the area. Planning Commission and Council need to
determine if development of the pathway at this time is premature.
Perhaps it could be done at a later time in conjunction with completion of
the entire pathway system, with the cost of the pathway assessed evenly
over all of the properties benefiting. The approximate cost of this additional
segment is $11,500.
POTENTIAL CONNECTION OF COUNTY ROAD 118 TO
COUNTY ROAD 75 VIA MEADOW OAK AVENUE
From time to time, there has been discussion of connecting Meadow Oak
Avenue to County Road 118, thus providing a direct link to the freeway for
traffic generated by the Chelsea Corridor and Cardinal Hills area and
points west. The potential of making this connection should be discussed at
this time, as the prospect of the increased traffic at this location could have
an impact on the sale of lots at Eastwood Knoll. Perhaps it is impossible to
predict at this time whether or not Meadow Oak Avenue will be extended
through. The main purpose of raising this issue is to determine how the
City will represent the situation to prospective buyers. Perhaps the best
that, we can say is that connection of Meadow Oak Avenue to 118, though
not planned at this time, remains a possibility fir Clio future.
On the other hand, the possible connection may have little hearing on the
livability of the subdivision because Meadow Oak Lane is separated from
Eastwood Knoll. In all reality, due to the fact that Meadow Oak Avenue is
well separated from the development area, whether or not it becomes a
through street may have no bearing at all on the desirability of the lots at
Eastwood Knoll.
YOUNG OAK TREES
One of the interesting characteristics of the site includes the presence of a
multitude of young oak trees that could he easily transplanted to other
locations within the city. City staff is looking at options to preserve these
young oak trees and perhaps replant them at various locations within the
city.
UTILITY SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
The City Engineer is completing a feasibility study which outlines the cost
to extend sewer, water, roads, storm sewer, etc. According to the work
completed to date, it appears that it is feasible to serve the site. It should
he noted that the sanitary sewer line will include a service stub that would
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
allow the potential connection of a service line to the property to the west of
the site. Please see the feasibility study and grading plan for more detail.
If is not included in the packet, it will be presented at the meeting on
Monday.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve or approve and modify the preliminary plat of the
Eastwood Knoll.
Under this alternative, Planning Commission and City Council are
satisfied with the development concept and its design in terms of the
original planned unit development concept for the area.
Potential modifications to the plan could include connection of the
Eastwood Court circle through to Meadow Oak Avenue, thus reducing
the length of the cul-de-sac and providing an outlet to Meadow Oak
Avenue. This would also decrease the amount of traffic expected on
Meadow Oak Lane. On the other hand, making this connection
would reduce the exclusivity of the homes on Eastwood Court. In
addition, in the event that Meadow Oak Avenue is connected to 118
to the west, Eastwood Court would become the most direct route to
Meadow Oak Avenue for traffic going westerly on Meadow Oak
Avenue.
Also as part of the discussion, Planning Commission and Council
should review the pathway system in detail and determine to what
extent pathway development should occur beyond the extension of the
pathways connecting the cul-de-sacs to the park at Outlot A. Is it
appropriate at this time to extend the pathway along the southern
boundary of the property to the park at Outlot E? If further pathway
development is desired at this time, and if Planning Commission and
Council believe that the cost of the pathway should he assessed to all
benefiting property owners, then a public hearing would need to he
called on a public improvement. The timing of the public hearing
would coincide with awarding of the contract.
Motion to deny or table approval of the Eastwood Knoll plat.
Planning Commission and Council should select this alternative if it
is not comfortable that the plan its proposed will meet the goals of the
City or the intent of the original planned unit development.
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Planning Commission and Council select alternative
#1. With regard to connecting Eastwood Court to Meadow Oak Avenue, for
reasons outlined in the discussion above, staff supports approval of the plat
as presented. With regard to extension of the pathway to the existing park
at Outlot E, it is our view that the pathway should be constructed now. It
is our view that the added cost to construct the path is justifiable, as it adds
value to the subdivision by providing direct access to the park, thereby
avoiding the need to walk a significant distance around the existing
developed Meadow Oak Estates area.
The balance of the Meadow Oak area pathway construction should be done
sometime in the next two to three years and financed via an area -wide
assessment program. It is our view that the internal pathway system
benefits each parcel equally and could be fairly assessed accordingly.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the Eastwood Knoll plat; Copies of the original PUD and proposed
pathway development plans for the area; Copy of proposed restrictive
covenants; Feasibility study in packet or to be provided at the meeting.
EASTWOOD KNOLL
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS
Whereas, the City of Monticello, a municipal corporation under the laws of the
state of Minnesota (the "Developer"), is presently the owner of lots in the
Eastwood Knoll platted subdivision located in the city of Monticello, county of
Wright, and state of Minnesota, according to the plat and survey thereof on file
and of record in the office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for said county and
state (hereafter referred to as "Subdivision") declares that all of those lots still
owned of record by said developer in the Subdivision are, and for the period of
time hereafter staved shall be, subject to the following protective covenants,
restrictions, and conditions, and that every subsequent owner of said lots shall be
bound to said covenants, restrictions, and conditions, and shall accept title subject
thereto.
Land Use and Buildine Tvue. Each lot shall be used exclusively for
residential purposes. No building shall be erected, altered, placed, or
permitted to remain on any lot other than one detached single family
dwelling, together with appurtenant garage, fence, swimming pool, or
accessory structure.
Architectural Control. No building shall be erected, placed, or altered on
any lot until the construction plans and specifications and the plans
showing the location of the structure have been approved in writing by the
architectural control committee as to the quality of workmanship and
materials, harmony of external design with existing structures, and as to
the location with respect to topographic and finished grade elevation. In the
event the Developer, or its designated representative, fails to approve or
disapprove such design and location within 30 days after said plans and
specifications have been submitted to it, approval will not be required, and
this provision will be deemed to have been fully complied with.
Quality and Size. No dwelling constructed on any portion of the Developer
property shall contain less than 1,400 sq ft on the ground floor in the case
of a single story structure, not less than 1,350 sq ft on the ground floor in
the case of a split entry/modified two-story structure, and not less than
1,000 sq ft on the ground floor in the case of a structure containing two or
more stories, provided that the aggregate square footage for all levels is not
less than 2,000 sq ft. Finished basements below the ground level will not be
counted for meeting the square footage minimums except that a one-story
structure can use up to 600 sq ft of finished basement area toward meeting
the 2,000 sq ft minimum if the one-story structure is a walkout. Each
single family dwelling shall contain a three -car garage. Unless otherwise
waived by the architectural control committee, all building structures shall
be designed with a minimum 8/12 roof pitch.
EASTWOOD.COV: 3/14/94 Page 1
Temoorary Structures. No structure of a temporary character or nature,
trailer, tent, or shack may be used on any lot at any time as a residence,
either temporarily or permanently. All structures shall be completed and
finished on the exterior within nine months after commencement of the
excavation or construction thereof, and before the structure shall be used as
a residence. No dwelling shall be constructed of concrete blocks or blocks of
similar type on any lot unless the outer or exterior walls above and below
grade are stuccoed or painted within six months of the time of
commencement of construction.
Nuisances. No accumulation of junk, garbage, or debris may be maintained
on any lot. No trailer house, travel trailer, buses, trucks, camper trucks, or
junk cars are allowed to be stored on premises unless properly garaged.
6. Architectural Control Committee. The architectural control committee shall
consist of the City of Monticello Building Official and/or a designated
representative of the Developer. The Building Official and/or the
Developer's designated representative shall review all building structure
plans and specifications for adherence to the covenants and restrictions that
relate to minimum building standards along with the harmony of the
exterior design and location in relation to surrounding structures.
Term. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions of this declaration shall
run with and bind the land comprising the Developer property and shall be
enforceable by the declarants, the owners, and the respective legal
representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns for a term of ten years from
the date this declaration is recorded, after which time said covenants,
conditions, and restrictions shall be automatically renewed for successive
periods of ten years. The provisions hereof shall be deemed independent
and several, and the invalidity or partial invalidity or unenforceability of
any one provision or portion thereof as may be determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any of
the other provisions hereof. This declaration may only be amended by a
written instrument signed by Developer and all owners of the Developer
ProPerty-
EASTWOOD.COV: 3/14/84 Page 2 /
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands this day
of .1994.
DEVELOPER
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By:
Mayor
By:
City Administrator
State of Minnesota)
County of Wright )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1994, by , the Mayor, and
Rick Wolfsteller, the City Administrator, of the city of Monticello, a Minnesota
municipal corporation, on behalf of said municipality.
Notary
EASTWOOD.COV: 3/14/94 page 3
l �l
EASTWOOD KNOLL PATHWAY PLAN AMENDMENTS .
1. Relocate Briar Oakes access point
"• to avoid trees .•
2. Extend pathway through both culdesacs ••' +
'r 3. No change to east -vest pathway along
pewerline easement. j=
MIDD L . PAR
SCMooL — --- -
;; ,?
'J PARk
Pat K
4
f i
�opmed area
'% roe zone...
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
s. Consideration of rezoning Outlots C and D of the Meadow Oak
subdivision from R -PUD to R-1. ADolicant. Citv of Monticello. (J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
If Planning Commission and City Council agree that the R-1 design of
Eastwood Knoll is in harmony with the original PUD, then it is appropriate
at this time to consider rezoning the site from R -PUD to R-1. The R-1
zoning designation is necessary because the site itself features R-1
characteristics. Furthermore, the site meets all R-1 density, yard, and
infrastructure design requirements; therefore, the R-1 zoning designation is
more appropriate than the R -PUD designation.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve rezoning of Outlots C and 1) of the Meadow Oak
subdivision from 11 -PUD to R-1. Motion is based on the finding that
the subdivision design of the Eastwood Knoll is consistent with R-1
standards, and the design of the Eastwood Knoll is also consistent
with the original intent of the R -PUD plan originally proposed for the
Meadow Oak area.
2. Motion to deny rezoning request.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative q 1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of zoning map; Copy of proposed ordinance amendment.
P
moed
re zone -
1 15
I i 1
g° r.
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, HEREBY ORDAINS
THAT THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAY BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
Itezone Outlots C and 1), Meadow Oak Estates, from 11-111Jll (residential
planned unit development) W It -I (single family residential).
Adopted this 28th day of March, 1994.
Mayor
City Administrator
ci
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
Consideration of a resolution ordering plans and specifications for
the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. Applicant. Citv of Monticello.
(J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
If the City Council is comfortable with the preliminary plat and associated
costs as outlined in the feasibility study, then Council should adopt the
resolution authorizing preparation of plans and specifications. As noted in
the previous agenda item, there are some unresolved issues relating to the
timing of development of the east/west pathway along the power line
corridor. If the City Council would like the pathway to he completed to
allow the subdivision to have access to the existing park facility, then the
City Engineer should be directed to prepare plans accordingly. Bret Weiss
will be reviewing the feasibility study in more detail so as to provide
Council with better information as to the design and cost of the necessary
improvements.
13. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Motion to adopt the resolution ordering plans and specifications for
the Eastwood Knoll subdivision.
2. Motion to deny adoption of the resolution ordering plans and
specifications for the Eastwood Knoll subdivision.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Assuming that the City Council remains comfortable with the prospect of
developing and marketing the lots in this subdivision, City staff
recommends that the Council adopt the resolution authorizing preparation
of plans and specifications.
Council should be reminded that this is the "no turning back point" in the
process. Development of plans and specifications requires a substantial
investment which would be lost if the City ultimately sells the property for
private development.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution for adoption
RESOLUTION 94 -
RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT
AND ORDERING PREPARA'T'ION OF
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the Council adopted February 28, 1994, a
preliminary plat and associated public improvement feasibility report has been
prepared by Taylor Land Surveyors and OSM with reference to the improvement
of Outlots C and D of Meadow Oak Estates (Eastwood Knoll), and this preliminary
plat and report were received by the Council on March 28, 1994.
NOW, THEREFORE, 13E IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA:
1. OSM is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall
prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement.
2. The Council will consider the improvement of Outlots C and D in
accordance with the report and will finance all of the cost of the
improvement at an estimated total cost of $
Adopted this 28th day of March, 1994
Mayor
City Administrator
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
Receive update on status of RFP process - Outlot A. Country Club
Manor. (J.0.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you recall, a few weeks ago Council approved a request for proposals for
parties interested in purchasing Outlot A of Country Club Manor for
residential development. This is to let you know that on March lb, the City
received two proposals, one from Shelter Corporation and the other from
Hornig Properties. Unfortunately, time has not allowed me to complete a
sunvnary report comparing the two proposals. Due to the complexity of
each proposal, they are somewhat difficult to compare on an apples -to -
apples basis. It is, therefore, recommended that any review of the proposals
he delayed until staff review is complete. My goal is to have the
information available in time for the next Council meeting.
If you would like to review the proposals in detail prior to receiving them in
your April 11 agenda packet, please see me.
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
e. Consideration of aparovine and authorizing advertisement of
community arena design studv RFP. (J.O.)
RFFFRFNCF AND RAt.KnROIiND:
Attached you %vill find a draft of a request for proposals for design work
necessary in conjunction with development of the community arena. Please
review the RFP itself for further information on its purpose.
At the previous meeting of the community arena task force, the task force
agreed that a design firm appointed by the City is needed to assist the task
force and the City in developing final design and cost estimates. The
information generated by the report will become the basis of the referendum
and the basis of a possible design build construction process.
It was the consensus of the task force that the City must be the party hiring
the arena consultant because the City will be ultimately responsible for
funding the project and maintaining it. The community arena group will be
providing the cash necessary to conduct the study and is requesting that the
investment in the study be counted as a portion of the $100,000
contribution requirement. In addition to the facility design and cost
estimates, the consultant will be asked to review the plan for management
and operation of the facility and assist in preparation of an annual budget
showing projected cash flows, etc. This information will be necessary in
order to determine to what extent the initial debt can be paid back through
revenues in excess of operations expenses.
G. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve RFP and authorize advertisement to various arena
consultants and allow the funds provided to conduct the study to he
deducted from the $100,000 requirement.
2.. Motion to approve RFP and authorize advertisement to consultants;
however, funds provided for the study should not be deducted from
the $100,000 requirement.
3. Motion to deny or table approval of the RFP and withhold
advertisement to consultants.
Council Agenda - 3/28/94
City Council should select this alternative if it is comfortable with
conducting a referendum based on the information collected by the
arena association to date on site plan improvement expenses and
huilding design costa, etc.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends alternative #L We feel that it is imperative that in order
for the referendum to be conducted, we need to have a preliminary design
and associated cost figures completed by a firm authorized by the City. It
also appears reasonable to allow the arena association to deduct the cost of
the study from the $100,000 requirement because development of
preliminary design specifications and associated planning expenses are part
of any construction project and are a legitimate expense that would have
otherwise been paid via the bond issue.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of request for proposals; Copy of community arena task force minutes.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
DESIGN AND PLANNING CONSULTATION
for the
MONTICELLO COMMUNITY ARENA
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
SECTION I
PURPOSE OF REQUEST
The City of Monticello is requesting proposals from professional firms for design
and planning services relating to a proposed multi-purpose community arena
hereafter referred to as the "community arena." The design work completed will
result in a recommendation on the community arena's size, configuration
complexity, and construction costs. Concepts and facility goals supporting the
design work will be provided by a community arena task force, which is made up
of two Council members, two Township Board members, two School Board
members, and two members of the Monticello Community Arena Association.
Preparation of the design work under this proposal will be done in anticipation of
construction of the facility via a "design build" process; therefore, an objective of
the design and planning effort is preparation of documentation supporting a
"design build" process.
SECTION 2
GENERAL STUDY AREAS
The design work will result in a a final community arena plan which will be the
basis for a general referendum to he conducted at the general election in
November 1934. The design work shall address the following areas:
Site design recommendations including site layout and parking
Preliminary facility design including building design options and
selections
Facility and site improvements cost analysis
Operations budget - projected cash flow analysis
Ice -making equipment design
Utilities
Locker rooms
Graphic presentations
Incorporation of volunteer labor into construction process
ARENA.RFP: 3/22/94 Page 1 �
SECTION 3
SCOPE OF WORK
General
The scope of work
of the feasibility study as presented should consist of the
following phases:
Phase I:
Review of design concepts/facility goals
Phase II:
Preliminary facility design and budget
Phase III:
Conclusions and recommendation
PHASE I - REVIEW OF FACILITY GOALS/DESIGN ALTERNATFVES/BUDGET
LIMITATIONS
Meeting k1:
Review community arena site, review proposed arena uses, goals
and ideas
Define necessary community arena attributes/amenities
Discuss alternative community arena design options to meet goals
Discuss capital budget limitations
Task force identifies volunteer labor resources
Task force identifies facility management and staffing plan
Establish preliminary design alternatives and options
Consultant prepares preliminary design alternatives including: site master
plan, floor plan, building elevations, site utilities, parking, drainage, etc.
Consultant prepares construction cost estimates and projected annual
operation budget.
PHASE 11 - REVIEW PRELIMINARY FACILITY DESIGN AND BUDGET
Meeting p2:
Consultant presents preliminary design alternatives
Consultant presents cost estimates which incorporates utilization of
volunteer labor
Task force identifies preferred alternative
ARENA.RFP: 3/22194 Page 2
r�4 I
Task force discusses annual personnel and mechanical operational
costs, identifies revenue stream, and establishes annual budget for
incorporation into final report
Consultant prepares site plan drawings and narrative for public review.
Consultant prepares final cost estimates.
Consultant prepares documentation supporting subsequent design build
process.
PHASE III - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Meeting ti3:
Task force reviews documentation prepared under phase II
Consultant makes final changes.
Schedule
The firm selected must be capable of beginning work immediately on the project.
Based upon the scope of work as previously set forth, the following schedule needs
to he maintained.
Meeting 1, Phase I April 28, 1994
Meeting 2, Phase lI complete May 17, 1994
Meeting 3, Phase III complete May 31, 1994
Instruction for Submissions
A. Proposals should be sent and all questions and correspondence directed to:
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
PO Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
B. Proposals must be in a sealed envelope and clearly marked in the lower left
corner:
JEFF O'NEILL, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
MONTICELLO COMMUNITY ARENA PROPOSAL
C. Proposals shall be received no later than , at which
time they will be opened. Submit four (4) copies of the proposal.
ARENA.RFP: 3/22/94 Page 3 i
L
D. The City will review all proposals and notify all proposers of the firms to be
interviewed for final consideration.
E. Identify firm, address, telephone number, and contact person responsible for
the proposal and, if appropriate, information regarding joint venture by two
or more firms.
F. The firm shall include a statement(s) regarding their approach to the
project.
G. Proposal must clearly indicate the project manager and members of the firm
who will be involved in the project and their responsibility for its
completion. The proposal must contain the qualifications of key persons
assigned to the project.
H. Provide recent examples of work of a similar nature, size, and individuals
who may he contacted regarding these projects as references. The projects
should be representative of both the firm and oroiect manager who would be
assigned to Monticello if the firm is awarded the project.
Firms may submit graphic materials (photos, drawings, etc.) illustrating
past experience.
A commitment to begin the work promptly, if selected, and ability to assign
persons named to meet requirements of work.
Selection Criteria for Interview
Selection of the firm to conduct feasibility study for the City shall be based upon
the following:
A. Responsiveness of the written proposal to the purpose and scope of the
project.
Q. Reputation of qualifications of the firm, project team, staff and support, and
associated firms (if any) to provide the requested service.
C. Firm's approach to the project. Additional selection criteria pertaining to
firms of the project, management style, responsiveness to client, public
image, etc., will be part of the final selection process.
Terms and Conditions
A. The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any and all proposals or
to select the one considered the most advantageous for the City. Selection
shrill not, be on fee structure alone.
ARENA.RFP: 3/22/94 Page 4 4j
If, for any reason, the firm selected is not able to commence services under
its proposal within 10 days after its award, the City reserves the right to
award the contract to the next most qualified firm.
The City requires affirmative action; therefore, the firm selected shall not
discriminate under the contract against any person in accordance with
federal, state, and local regulations.
D. Fee. The fee for the preparation of the study and all drawings and graphics
as previously described will be made in two payments; the first payment, in
a sum of 3570 of the study cost, shall be made upon completion of Phase 1I1,
and the remaining 65% shall be paid within 30 days of the completion of the
study.
The fee for the feasibility study includes the following items:
Labor costs
Expenses --telephone, reproduction, travel, postage, & deliveries
Overhead and administrative costs
The proposer shall provide ten (10) copies of the study to the task force.
Additional copies will be charged for the cost of printing.
If, for any reason, the firm shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner
the obligations under the contract, the City shall reserve the right to
terminate said contract by specifying the date of termination in a written
notice to the firm at least thirty (30) calendar days before the termination
date. In this event, the firm shall be entitled to just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed.
F. No elected official or employee of the City who exercises any responsibilities
in the review, approval, or carrying out of the proposal or contract shall
participate in any decision which affects his or her direct or indirect
personal or financial interest.
G. The firm shall not assign any interest in this contract and shall not transfer
any interest without prior written consent of the City.
ARENA.RFP: 3/22/94 Page 5