Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 04-10-1995AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL, Monday, April 10, 1995 - 7 p -m - Mayor: Brad Fyle Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held March 27, 1995. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. , r 34. PPFaar 5-rwo Audwt Tb PACG. Co—VYN SA dF oc_ 4. Citizens co amentalpetitions, requests, and complaints. 6. Continued Public Hearing -Consideration of a resolution awarding contract and ordering project - Southwest Area Utilities Extension, Project 95-01C. 6. Consideration of a resolution accepting bid and ordering project - Meadow Oak Storm Sewer Outlet, Project 93-12C. 7. Consideration of a resolution adopting negative declaration of impact - Klein Farms residential development. 8. Consideration of approving final plat and adopting development agreement - Mein Fauns residential subdivision. 9. Consideration of a resolution accepting bids, awarding contract, and ordering improvement - Nein Farms residential subdivision, Project 95.02C. 10. Consideration of terms of sale - Outlot A, Country Club Manor. 11. Consideration of establishing marketing strategy for the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. 12. Consideration of purchase of a single electronic water use meter. 13. Consideration of approving a temporary on -sale liquor license for the Lions Club in cogjunction with the Riverfest Celebration. 14. Consideration of obsorvanco of Arbor Day. 16. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, March 27, 1898.7 p,m Members Present: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None Consideration of annroval of minutes of the regular meeting held March 13. 111'35. It was requested that the reference in item #7 to the Mississippi Shores senior housing facility be changed from a cost of $3.3 million to $3.5 million. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Tom Perrault to approve the meeting minutes with corrections as noted. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of adding items the agenda. A. City Council set a workshop date for the purpose of discussing the wastewater treatment plant and bio -solids site development issues. The special meeting was set for 5:45 p.m., April 10, 1995, immediately before the regular Council meeting. Citizens comments/aetitions, requests. and comnlaints. A. Joe Holthaus was in attendance to note his concern that the City should not consider purchasing the Hanaford property for biosolids application. He indicated that the two farmers using the property are not interested in allowing the biosolids application on site, and Ms. Hanford is not willing to sell. It was noted by Council that this site has not been selected as the site for biosolida application and that site selection issues will be discussed at the next workshop. Public Hearing --Consideration oC a resolution accenting bids. awarding nraiect. and ordering nroiect - Southwent Area Utility Extension (Pmiect 95-01C). Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested that Council table this issue pending additional input Brom property owners atlbcted by the project He noted that none of the property owners are in attendance at the public hearing and that perhaps they need to be updated on the project prior to ordering the project. Page 1 Council Minutes - 3/27/95 It was the consensus of Council to continue the public hearing to the neat Council meeting, at which time further action on the project would be taken. Considerption of acceptine Pqlice Commission rgpo4 which studies the merits of contractine vs. establishment of a local uolice department. Police Commissioners Warren Smith and Liz DesMarais were in attendance to outline the findings of a report studying the merits of contracting vs. establishment of a local police departm eaL. In Lis review, Smith noted that contracting for police department services has proven to be a very economical and effective method for providing police protection in the city of Monticello and that this method of providing service should continue to serve the needs of the community in the future. City Council thanked the Police Commission for providing the report, which provided hard numbers outlining the benefits of contracting for service. The report will be useful in answering questions that come from the public from time to time wondering why the City doesn't have its own police department. Cgnsideration of a5cen ne plans pnd imegifications and authorizing advertisement for bids - Cardinal Hills Phase V. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to accept plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for Cardinal Hills phase V. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95.21. Consideration of a resolution accepting feasibility study and authorizing glgparption of plans and snecifications for complotion of School Boulevard rjpm Fallon Avenue to Highway 25. City Engineer Bret Weiss reviewed the feasibility study. In his review, Weiss described the design and cost estimates associated with extending School Boulevard from its current end point at Fallon Avenue to Highway 26. He also described sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer improvements that would enable development of the 110 -acre Ocello business center area. In his summary, Weiss noted that sanitary sewer expenses aro estimated at $218,000; water main, $246,000; storm sewer, $188,000; and street improvements, $636,000, for a total project cost of $1,187,000. Weiss noted that according to City assessment policies, the City will pay $280,000 in oversiaing expenses. The balance of the project costs Page 2 Council Minutes - 3127/95 will be assessed against the Monticello Business Center and the Klein Farms properties. Weiss went on to note that the portion assessed ($906,000) will be secured by a letter of credit in the amount of 60% of this cost along with the value of the land as collateral. Discussion focused on the entrance to School Boulevard from Highway 25. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Tom Perrault to adopt a resolution accepting the feasibility study and authorizing preparation of plans and spedGwUmw under Option A, which did not include a center island at the entrance to School Boulevard. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95-22. 9. Consideration of adoptine terms of We - Outlot A. Country Club Manor. City staff presented the City Council with potential terms of sale for Outlet A, Country Club Manor, to David Hornig. Due to the fact that Mr. Hornig was not in attendance, it was the consensus of Council to table this matter to an upcoming meeting. 10. Consideration of auDroaches toward market�ne and sale of Eastwood Knoll PronertV• Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed various approaches that the City may want to take toward marketing of the property. Brad Fyle expressed his preference to place the lots on the market for two or three months to see what happens. It was his view that the City should place restrictive covenants on the property and sell the Iota as is for cash only. If the City is unsuccessful in selling the properties by owner, then we could consider contracting with a real estate Arm to sell the lots that are remaining. O'Neill informed Council that Orrin Thompson Homes is interested in purchasing and developing a site for homes in the $120,000 to $166,000 range. He noted that Orrin Thompson's interest is not well defined at this point and that perhaps the Council would wish to consider tabling the matter until the City receives a formal offer. After discussion, a motion was made by Brian Stumpf and seconded by Tom Perrault to table further discussion of Eastwood Knoll marketing approaches and authorize City staff to discuss the matter fiuther with Orrin Thompson Homes or any other developer interested in purchasing the entire Eastwood Knoll development area. Pogo 3 Council Minutes - 3/27/95 11. Consideration of amendmepts to the Cifv prdinance eoverning trees by reauiring additional tree nlantings on double -fronting jots. Assistant Administrator ONeill informed City Council that the Planning Commission requests that Council to consider amending the tree ordinance by requiring additional tree plantings on newly -developed lots that have street frontage on both the front and rear yards. For lots that do not have any trees whatsoever, the current ordinance requires that two trees be planted with each new home. Typically, the trees are placed in the front yard. The amended ordinance would require an additional two trees to be planted in the rear yard of newly -developed lots that have street frontage along the rear lot line. Clint Herbst expressed support for the ordinance amendment. He noted that he had driven through areas of town where double -fronting lots exist and noted that these areas would have been greatly improved if trees had been planted along rear lot lines when the original homes were constructed. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to adopt an ordinance amendment which requires an additional two trees to be planted in the rear yard of lots with street frontage on at least two sides. Motion carried unanimously. SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 267. 12. (`consideration of apnoinpna Citv renresentatives to Monticello Senior HqUain.&Aliiance Board. City Administrator Wolfsteller asked Council to consider appointing two new members to the Senior Housing Alliance Board following the resignation from the Board of Councilmembers Anderson and Herbst. Wolfsteller noted that there currently are no formal applications for service on the Senior Housing Alliance Hoard; however, a few names have been mentioned as potential candidates, including Arve Grimsmo, George Phillips, and Opal Stokes. Atter discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to direct the City Administrator to contact Grimsmo, Phillips, and Stokes to determine interest in serving on the Board and to appoint any two interested in serving to the Senior Housing Alliance Board. Motion carried unanimously. Page 4 Council Minutes - 3/27/95 13. Consideration of an aoplication far a one-dav &ambhne license - Ducks, Unlimited Banauet. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brian Stumpf to adopt a resolution approving the issuance of the license. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95-23. 14. Council Update --trunk storm sewer access chargg. Assistant Administrator O'Neill provided Council with a report updating the status of the trunk storm sewer access charge program. He noted that the City Engineer is working on identifying basic watershed areas in an attempt to determine the approximate cost per acre to serve specific watershed areas. Once this information is obtained, the City will be in position to actually implement the system. No further action was taken on this matter. 15. Ponsideration of bills for the month of March. 199¢. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the bills as submitted. Motion carried + unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 8 Council Agenda - 4/10195 8. Continued Ppblle Hearing--Contlideration of a regolution awsrdinq cQniract and orderine oroiect . Southwest Area Utilities Extenstion, Prosect 95.01C. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous meeting, the public hearing was continued and the item was tabled pending additional input from property owners and pending an updae to the original finance plan. City staff updated the finance plan based on the low bud received and held a meeting with the property owners regarding the project. All of the property owners in attendance at the meeting continue to support the project and underlying financing as noted in the attached finance plan. The City has a signed easement from Milton Olson at this time. It is expected that signed easements will be delivered to city staff by the affected property owners on Monday. Please see the attached supplement from the last meeting for additional information. 13.ALTERNATIVE ACTWM-. Motion to accept bids awarding project to Bonine Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $183,153.03 and order improvements for Southwest Area Utility Extension contingent on acquisition of all necessary easements. Motion to deny bids awarding project and order improvements for the Southwest Area Utility Extension. C. STAFF RECOMMZIDATION: City staff recommends approval of the resolution accepting the bid and awarding the project, contingent on the City obtaining easements as needed. I). SUPPORTING DATA: Updated finance plan; Agenda item from March 27, 1995; Copy of resolution. Council Agenda - 3/27/95 Public Hearing—Consideration of resolution aeeeotina bids. awarding conbWt and ordering oroiect • Southwest Area Utility, Extension (Prosect 98-010. W.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to conduct a public hearing on the improvement and consider accepting bids awarding contract and ordering improvements which calls for development of a lift station and extension of sanitary sewer and watermain from the present location at Sandberg Road to Gould's Chevrolet and D & D Bus Company. In November of 1994, the City Council reviewed a feasibility study and associated finance plan calling for development of a sanitary sewer and watermain system which would be extended from present position at Sandberg Road to D & D Bus Company. Prior to this action, City Council had received petitions from D & D Bus, Gould's Chevrolet and Gehardt Everson. Two other properties affected by the project include Stuart Hoglund property and the Milton Olson property. The finance plan supporting the development is being updated based on the bid tab and will be presented at the meeting. Please note that all of the parties that are involved in this project have reviewed the original finance plan and none have indicated an objection to the plan. It appears that everyone recognizes that the need for sewer and water systems to be extended into this area is necessary at this time and that the original proposed assessment amounts are consistent with the added value that will be created for each property when the project is completed. The updated finance plan being presented on Monday will reveal slightly higher costs than expected for the lateral sewer and water improvements. As an update to previous actions, the Township Board did sign the joint resolution allowing the annexation of the Gould Chevrolet property and D & D Bus Company. Therefore, the City is now in position to assess Gould's and D & D Bus properties as well as the Milton Olson property and Gehardt Everson property for their share of the cost of the improvements. The fifth property that remains in the township (Stuart Hoglund property) may not be assessed for the benefit received until such time that tho property is annexed into the City. At such time as the Hoglund property comes into the City, o separate assessment hearing will be conducted and the Hoglund property will then be assessed its share of the cost of the improvement project, This project consists of a trunk lift station and a short piece of trunk sewer constructed on Marvin Road which will temporarily discharge into our existing sanitary sewer system in the area and the construction of lateral 0 Council Agenda - 3/27/95 sanitary sewer and storm sewer to service 2 properties located in the City, Gould Chevrolet, and D & D Bus, as well as 25 acres of the Hoglund property. Only a temporary trunk watermain connection is being proposed at this time. The engineer's estimate for the project was $161,029.25. City staff and the engineer built an alternate into the project to make use of the existing pumps and control panel from our lift station near the reservoir as that, one is in need of upgrading this year. On Friday, March 24, 1995, the City received eight (8) bids for the project. The bids range from a low of $163,153.03 to a high of $253,027.56. The low bid was received from Bonine Excavating, Inc. of Elk River, Minnesota. They also offered us an alternate or discount of $12,500 to delete the pumps, electrical connections and control panel from the project so that we could reuse the ones from the reservoir lift station. Refurbishing the lift station pumps from the reservoir, installing the used control panel and complete wiring is estimated at a cost of around $5,000 to $6,000. Consequently, we could realize a savings in the neighborhood of $6,000 or $7,000 by reusing those existing pumps. The pumps, however, being provided with the new lift station would have a greater capability and last longer before they aro upgraded than the old reservoir lift station pumps. As of the date of the writing of this memo, I have reviewed the need for the drainage and utility easements with the affected property owners. All of the property owners have indicated that they will sign the easement documentation, thereby paving the way for installation of the utilities. Please note, however, that in the event the easements have not been signed by the time the Council meets, that any action that Council takes to order the project would have to be contingent on the City obtaining signed easements from all of the affected property owners. Motion to accept bids awarding project to Bonine Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $163,153.03 and order improvements for Southwest Area Utility Extension contingent on acquisition of all necessary easements. Under this alternative, City Council remains comfortable with the finance plan and project concepts discussed in November, 1994. If 0 Council Agenda - 3/27/95 this alternative is selected, City staff will make sure that easements are obtained and that the project commences on a timely basis. At such time as the project is completed, a separate assessment hearing will be held for the purpose of defining the final distribution of costs to the benefitting property owners. Please refer to the attached chart for an update to the finance plan that was approved by Council in November. The new plan shows the updated figures based on the bid received on Friday. Motion to deny bids awarding project and order improvement - Southwest Area Utility Extension. This alternative should be selected if the City Council is uo longer comfortable with moving forward on this project. There does not appear to be any new information at this time that would cause Council to change its direction on this matter. If one of the property owners is reluctant to grant easements necessary to complete the project, then such a position might have an impact on the Council's decision. In my discussions with the property owners, this does not appear to be a possibility. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative I1 based upon the bids being within the engineer's estimate and based upon the information concerning use of used pumps at this location. Staff would recommend saving our pumps from the reservoir project for spares and install new pumps at the Marvin Road lift station. The City Engineer and staff are reviewing the components of the low bid to determine the portions to be paid by the City and property owners. This information will be provided at Monday evening's meeting after all of the bide have been verified and summarized. Copy of bid tabulation; Copy of preliminary finance plan; Copy of resolution. a) RESOLUTION 95. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID, AWARDING CONTRACT, AND ORDERING PROJECT ON SOLanwcDa AREA UTILITY EXTENSION AND APPURTENANT WORK PROJECT 95-01C WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 23rd day of January, 1995, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement of a lift station and extension of sanitary sewer and watermain from its present location near Sandberg Road to Gould's Chevrolet and D & D Bus Company, and WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvements to the Snuthwest Area Utilitiy Extension, Project 95-01C, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to law, and the attached bids were received complying with the advertisement; and AND WHEREAS, it appears that Bonine Construction, Inc., of Elk River, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder with a bid amount of $183,153.03; WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' pubbahed notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon the 27th day of March, 1995, and continued on the 10th day of April, 1995, at which all persona desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA-- Such INNESOTA: Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Bonine Construction, Inc., in the name of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, for improvements to the Southwest Area Utility Extension and appurtenant work according to the plans and sped ications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Administrator. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the aucrosdW bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 10th day of April, 1995. Mayor City Administrator (:D ®p �c co L� I T.: ar ►.w 3 r1 +w.er..r4a it PRELIMINARY FINANCE PLAN SOUTHWEST AREA TRUNKjE1dlERAElD_TR1ZNK WATERMAIN PROJECT EXPENSE/FEE SUMMARY LM 6tdlan —Tort Las" Swlior 6wLm" .Id Fwa w v. w. 'n" Tow Aarr 'wn 67pw_ En— *6 Cad Pnt)4t1 _ F, sloo.m s20.610 $30.296 U& M s1.d70 sMAu *The* FM La1wd Tm* LAwd Told 6w1 Som AwM h. Ewa Awl. Fw 0 Q sww 8aw7 wow wdw L q �✓ ny � A PROPFUMS ® AWC rr / c lec C oftm . %,022 $o $0.7 19 $0,064 $26.606 p� YA evw.a+ 6 ® s3m $4126 $0.710 stool WOW Got" 6.1 x.376 $4022 $3.100 ✓ $0.710 ('11.240 s23.M3 0 ono 080 4.6 16.760. 26A22 s2.676 4/ (- s0.710 / -11 206 , `$6.710 ` $2201 0600Ad 6 16,260 $31m $3.126 $6.060 $23,085: The* %a ✓ / . L/ V A.4r.w11wb u9.em s29.010 $12.313 �p7AM 114A o - i 1! 7� d Gly owe 271.136 so s17A66 $0 s0 $69.124 P.wowd— 71% 0% 6011 0% 46%1 TOW am $100.7$3 I s20.610 $36,296 IMAM 111,670 106:0 —?OF, 1'�J Pn4.1 TOW No0.7$3 , $20.610 to g3AM sum $163,067 Phots 1 Put& $61.67: 0 Council Agenda - 4/10/95 6 Consideration of aprprd of Meadow Oak Trunk Storm Bawer Outlet Proiect b93.12C. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the March 13, 1995 meeting, the City Council held its second public hearing for the Meadow Oak Storm Sewer Project and reviewed bids received on March 3, 1995, for the project based upon s : edesien including_ an additional 5 CFM capacity for future development. The low bid was received from Barbarossa & Sons for $327,199.45 which included $82,595.45 for the street reconstruction. The low bid was within a couple percent of the engineer's estimate. After the public hearing and the review of bids, the City Council tabled award until agreement could be reached with MnDOT in regard to them sharing in the project for the drainage that comes off I-94 near Meadow Oak subdivisions and the westbound exit ramp for County Road 75. It is my understanding that we have reached a tentative agreement with MnDOT and the amount of money forthcoming for their share of the project will be approximately $50,000. The agreement should be available for Monday evening's meeting. In addition, we have obtained the permanent drainage easement from the Bauces and a temporary materials and equipment storage easement Brom the Bauees for the south end of Gillard Av NE and from Vic Hellman for a lot at the north end of Gillard Av NE and County Road 39. We have received all of the necessary clearances and permits to begin work on the project Since the 45 -day award period will expire before the next regularly scheduled meeting, it may be difficult to table the award further and retain the same low bid price. At the last meeting, the City Council requested additional information regarding possible assessments for the project. During the public hearing, it was stated that the proposed assessments would be $1,550 per acre for the storm sewer project based upon an estimated project coat of $379,385 and $8.18 per foot for the street replacement based upon a street replacement cost of $39,187. Please review the enclosed options for assessment which will be explained in detail Monday night. It should be noted that the enclosed alternatives do not vary significantly in the proposed amount of assessment for storm sewer but do vary somewhat in principal. Some of them may conflict with our existing assessment policy found in the back of your city ordinance book. In addition, since we have not yet approved the final draft of the storm sewer assessment and access policy, some of the alternatives hero could be in conflict with that Mal policy. Since this is not an assessment hearing fbr the project, it is not necessary to pick the final assessment for this project and the Council should not do that at this time. You can indicate a preference for which Council Agenda - 4/10/96 method you would prefer. If you choose a particular one to be studied further in conjunction with the storm sewer assessment and access policy and existing city ordinance, we can do that and bring that information up when we consider the final draft of the storm sewer assessment policy. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The first alternative is to consider a resolution accepting the low bid from Barbarossa & Sons of $327,199.46 for the Meadow Oak Storm Sewer Outlet Project 1193-12C and award a contract ordering the project. The project is expected to begin in early June and be completed by August 16th. The second alternative is to not award the bid at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is staffs recommendation that the City Council consider awarding the project to Barbarossa & Sons as outlined in alternative 111. D. SUPPORTING DATA. Copy of project cost report and cost share methods; Copy of 3 alternatives for possible assessment for Project #F93 -12C; Copy of resolution. Qq Project No. 93 -UC OSM Project No. 5489.00 Construction Cost: 5327,199.45 Indirect Cost (2848): 291.513.5 Total Project Casty $418,815.00 Street Reconstruction: S 39,187.00 ($7,43&00 Township Funding) Total Storm Sewer Project Cost: $379,628.000 (This assumes assessment of Gillard Avenue reconstruction) Total Project Cost After Township Contribution (This does not include any Qillard Avenue Street assessment with the exception of the Township share) :418,515.00 . $7,438.00 - $411,377.00 Dralnap Area: 183 acres Private developed areas including Burlington Northern and 70 acres in the Township. 163 acres - 194 right-of-way 31.7 acres - City street right-of-way 13A acres • Oudots A&F. Meadow Oaks Estate (City of Monticello Property) 243 Total - Acres in Drainage Area kv.M%ctrn%MXAoov (D Meadow Oaks Outlet Qty Project No. 93.120 OSM Project No. 548940 Cost Share Method N I Spread an equal share of oasts to entire drainage area • Use Stoma Sewer Project Cost 5379.628110 245 acres $1,550.00/acre • Use Total Project Cost Less Township Contribution 5411377.00 245 acres $1,679.00/acre COMMMIN • This method does not include any additional drainage area acreage associated with the storm sewer oversWrgl, • This method would include a significant City contribution (19%) for the City right-of-way and park land. Another 29% is Township land that is tat collectable at this time; including 20 acres of the Gene Bauer property that will not be collected • This method assumes a 6.65% contribution from Mn/DOT, which is lower than what is anticipated. Under this method, the Mn/DOT share would be $25,765.00 • $27.368.00. • The total project cost less Township contribution would eliminate the proposed street assessment along Gillard Avenue. wuawrx w.WWWW 0 APR e7 '95 12:19 OSM MPLS, FPI P,1 momm Oaks odd a4l hVi- - ft 93-12C Qslm PW&i Na SMA. • I Shur Method a 2 •, /� . . $edam project aws b bb/ Da COQ. but Wbi�iCt MD,D�P an and • !,!M lit00m SmQ FIrrims coo law •'••'I w• Cannumon 24S maser • 163 mtsros 228.7 acres f1.458.80/ace • Ume raw Project Can !,w tbvmtbtp Counumum sad Mo/DOT CAMURNAM - �113Tf�D - tdd11�00 • 245 sores • 163 aces 2287 aces SU97. WSW O • 7%medpod docs not iodttde aW addldooal draluep am acrup asmoclued wdtb the wrm tower ovead dv& • TMr metbd world bdwk a tipi8am City onubrtba (19%) for the City OPWAA alt mod park land Aaothet 2996 is Township land that Is not oou mb6 at dds them; i xWft 20 mu of the Om Ban ar property that wig oat he collected • Thb umbod bompmaus the aoddpaoed $46,000.00 conabud m Dom • To tow •PNJM oast less, Towmbtp aourbiden woald amt— the ' pnposod street womumew alemd Word Ave=& • Mb ttubW Wowfm robc*m otpz*a costs uft the bb/D=.. „ before doper ace eau Is desslop i This reduces the per ace oat for the enure bm fitted ares by acrd an sddidoml $61.00/aca r� APR 07 '95 1219 099 hPLS, MN P.2 Meadw Oak/ ou" n4 ftVMu No. 93-= OSM'Rpjara No. SMA dost Shue Meaty 0 •Spud the ooam to do pdvate derelop0d aroa p ha an add banal 160 am cfiom the adddOnel s eb worm mau wend Red= thou laajea act by me Mn/DW =nu&wim but add an add dwd 820MMOD appal cost for fame trunk .. ,, f, ,...moclmd i tb the additional 160 aaea • Una stoem st+srs Ficim cm, s3� sxaao - s4�000 00 + 183 aces +160 saes 343 aces f1.SS&W/aaa • Urn T" Pr im Cost Lea 7bmump CamtrlD d= 2411-M.00 . lM000.OD A• l�m.m m u_t 197_m_ a t 183 aces + 160 aaa --- - 343 aces - i1r648.00/ane • This method,addmeua additional saeads aaodated with the inaeased S da storm sewer apuby. • M6 method does not mHea am from asiglo8 chy -m or put land. • 71>is method resumes the need to espend trunk fuWls (aprpr. t200M) in order to iaoorpomw the addW=d 160 aces. • Thb method ammo dUtfkm stermwater damp wM be developed wlthln the additioad 160 aces at no additional a@W asst to addidm dw eudre future plat ora is hteti" in the area a to the mdsd devektpad area4 wbkh do mt indude park land, pow or riga Eel own By: T.H,C. Dote = AVRIL 6, 1995 p r Ysyaron 6 �� 8chelen Auociala6. Ino. [glean Architect. • Planners a eerwren we /.r6 ft— 4r1u • 6116 H/Nb 6..b—d mNw.6.tr lu wu•un . 611-666-6116 Drawing Title METHOD •1 MEADOW OAK TRUNK STORM SEWER EXTENSION MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA JJ Comm. Yo. 1748.93 Figure RESOLUTION 95. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT ON MEADOW OAK STORM SEWER OUTLET AND NORTHEAST GILLARD AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT 93-12C WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Meadow Oak storm sewer ouetlet extending from the Meadow Oak subdivision to the Mississippi River along the Gillard Avenue alignment, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Name Bid Barbarossa & Sons $327,199.46 Ryan Contracting, Inc. $346,379.00 S.J. Louis Construction, Inc. $360,044.76 Schield Construction Company $364,262.21 Brown & Cris, Inc. $380,016.06 R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. $382,911.80 Kadlec Excavating of Mora, Inc. $387,727.36 Landwehr Construction, Inc. $397,687.00 LaTour Construction, Inc. $437,764.60 W.B. Miller $633,167.00 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., of Osseo, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., in the name of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, for the improvement of the Meadow Oak storm sewer outlet extending from the Meadow Oak subdivision to the Mississippi River along the Gillard Avenue alignment according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Administrator. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successfW bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 10th day of April, 1996. Mayor City Administrator d Council Agenda - 4/10/95 &a4dtm&n gf a resglujjon qdgptina a neeaNve jigclaragon of impact • Klein FarmiLresidential development. (J.OJ A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: City Council is asked to review the responses provided to the City by various agencies as the result of the publication of the environmental assessment worksheet on the Klein Farms development and to consider making a negative declaration of impact. The attached report from OSM describes in detail the content of the environmental assessment worksheet along with responses from various agencies providing comment on the plan; therefore, I will not describe the EAW information in any greater detail in the body of my report. According to the project schedule, the development agreement, final plat, and bid award, along with annexation, was supposed to have oaurred on April 10. These steps will need to be delayed until April 24 due to delays in obtaining the Township's signature on the joint resolution supporting annexation. It is expected that the Township will sign the joint resolution as noted in previous letters to the City at their meeting on April 17, 1995. The developer has expressed strong interest in getting started on grading prior to final City approval of the development agreement and prior to award of the project. He has indicated that he will be contacting the low bidder to determine if the bidder has an interest in starting site grading prior to actual award of the project. Under this scenerio, Tony Emmerich will be working out a separate deal with the low bidder to cover the low bidder's cost in the event that he is not awarded the project. At such time that the project is awarded, the City's contract would take effect, and the private arrangements between Emmerich and the contractor would sunset. Please let City stair know if you feel that this idea is inappropriate. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to adopt the resolution determining a negative declaration of impact associated with the Klein Farms residential subdivision. This alternative should be selected if the City Council does not think that an environmental impact statement is necessary to understand the impacts of the Klein Farms development Council Agenda - 4/10/95 Motion to deny adoption of a resolution determining a negative declaration of impact associated with the lGein Farms residential subdivision. This alternative should be selected if the City Council believes that an environmental impact statement is necessary to adequately address the impact of the lGein Farms development on the City. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 01 for reasons outlined in the attached document prepared by OSM. D. SUPPORTING DATA Copy of resolution; Copy of report from OSM; Copy of letter from MN Department of Health. RESOLUTION 88 - RESOLUTION DETERMINING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH THE KLEIN FARMS RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION Pit )JECT "C WHEREAS, the City of Monticello has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for this project, completed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet process, and has established the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as shown in the attached document; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as attached, that the City of Monticello hereby makes a negative declaration of impact and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. Adopted by the City Council this 10th day of April, 1895. Mayor City Administretor ArrACIiMENT TO RESOLUTION 95 - RESOLUTION FOR THE KLEIN FARMS DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO Klein Farms development is a proposed single femiy and multi-famiy, subdivision located on 180.3 acres In Wright County. As part of this proposed project, the City of Monticello will extend a 21' sanitary sewer trunk line and water main services to the development. This trunk sewer will have sufficient capacity to serve future development to the east, west, and south, comprising approximately 785 acres. There is also e proposed major street within the 180.3 acre site (School Boulevard), and other minor streets, an which will be paved, and associated curb, gutter and storm sewer. The project site will be constructed in several phases and when completed, will consist of 240 single lamiy, residences and 272 multi-fannity residences. An Emrironmentel Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared on the project. The EAW, comments on the EAW, responses to the comments, and other pertinent materials have been reviewed, and the City of Monticello hereby makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The development of the site as a residential development Is consistent with the long-range plans for the area. 2. No fish, wildlife or ecologically sensitive resources have been identified to be threatened or endangered as a result of the development of the land for residential development. 3. There are no shoretand districts on the site. 4. Two wetlands have been delineated by the National Wetlands Inventory (NN) map. The largest wetland is 3.1 acres, located In the southeast corner of the project site. The other wotland, located In the north hall of the southeast quarter Is approxlmntoy 1.5 acres, and was previously drained for agricultural purposes. This area Is currently being cultivated. Based on the information obtolned through the EAW, it appears that the developer will need to obtain permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Wright County Soil and Water Conservation District for this project for development of any wetlands on-site. 5. The developer has agreed to close the existing wells and septic system on the site in accordance with the Rules and Rogulations of the ^late of Minnesota. 8. Standard erosion control measures required by the City of Monticello, Wright County and the State of Minnesota will be followed during and after construction of the facility. Final site preparation and erosion control will require repair and re-astoblishmont of vogotation on all disturbed areas not utilized by residences. The developer will prepare a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. Those measures will consist of the placement and maintenance of erosion and sediment control devices such as sill fences and tato chocks, staging grading and excavation to Smit wind blown soil and the creation of temporary acdimontatlon pondo for run-off control during construction. The developer V48 also prepare a Permanent Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. Those measures will consist of the development of a sedimentation basin that complies with local, state, and federal regulations regarding stormwater management. 0 7. Approximately 140,000 gallons of domestic sewage win be generated by the proposed development per day. An sanitary sewage will be discharged Into l Ile City of Monticello sanitary sewer system and processed through the wastewater treatment plant. Sewer service to the area will consist of 10" to 21" Interceptor times, routed to provide service to the south-central development area. This development area Includes the service area covered by this EAW as well surrounding potential development areas. The City of Monticello operates its own wastewater treatment plant. Currently the plant has available capacity to treat the amount of wastewater anUcipated from the project site described herein, however, the rapid development of the City Is causing the plant to reach the capacity. The City council will determine whether expansion occurs and subsequently whether this entire site can be served. The City Is currently considering expansion of the plant for the interim as well as a 10-20 year expansion. S. The primary Impacted roadways from development of the project site are Felon Ave. located on the eastern boundary of the project site, County Road 117 located on the western boundary of the project site and School Boulevard which will be expanded west through the project site. Traffic volumes as a result of the completed development project site will Increase the demands placed on these existing roadways. A Transportation Study prepared by the City In June 1994 identised several recommendations to enervate future impacts of Increased traffic volumes in the vicinity of the project site. 9. Development of the project site will increase traffic volumes. However, the Transportation Study's recommendations for roadway improvements will minimize traffic congestion and is not likely to cause any significant decrease In air quality. 10. Construction should not generate more dust than currently occurs with the farming operation on the Bile. Oust during construction will be minimized by accomplishing the site grading In an expeditious manner and through watering of the area as conditions require. After seeding and sodding, dust win not be generated. 11. The project site Is located in an area experiencing development and has planned for such growth. Currently, 180 acres (SE 1/4, Seat. 14, T 121 N. R 25W) of the project site is located vWhin Monticello Township. This property is Identified as a Major Growth Area in the Wright County Lend Use Plan, It is also Identified as an urbanization area under the joint City/Township agreement governing Rnnoxaflon. The City of Monticello and Monticello Township have agreed In principle to allow the annexation to occur. the Municipal board Intones to consider annexation on May Slh. When the 180 Rare property Is annexed by the City of Monticello, it will be zoned R•1 (Single Famlly Residential) and R•PUD (Residontial•Plannod Unit Development). The romalning 20.3 acres, located within the City of Monticello, Is currently zoned PZ -M (Performance Zoned -Mixed). Under PZ•M dosignation, this area can be used for commercial or residentlel uses. The developer Intends to develop the property for residential ptuposes at o modium density population level consisting of 5 -units per acro. The annexation and rezoning of the 180.3 acre property are consistent with the long-range plans for the area. 12. The area surrounding the proposed site Is planned to be developed Into residential, Industrial and business uses. The cumulative impact to the area as a result of the development of the silo and the surrounding area win moan an increase in slormwetor runoff as the amount of Impervious surfaco increases. The City of Monticello has developed and Is In the process of developing stormwater retention ponds in the vicinity of the project site as wen as drainage systems to ensure that increased runoff is directed towards the Mississippi River. The City win design additional slormwator pawls in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations to ensure adequate treatment of the water for removal of potential pollutants prior to dlachnrgo to the Mississippi River. D 13. The Minnesota Department of Health expressed a concern regarding the proxlMty of the proposed holding pond to Mordicello's Wefi Number 4. To address this concern, the City will Install, as part of the development contract, a monitoring well to detennine If there is a hydraulic connection between the proposed holding pond and Monticello Well No. 4. II a connection exists, options will need to be considered, Including Installation of a finer as part of the developers contract. No grating n the affected area will be allowed until the deterndnation is made with regard t the Ener. The City could also decide to forego the Installation of the well and require the developer to Install a finer In the holding pond as part of the Initial pond construction. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed project Is expected to meet appfieable local and state requirements, standards, and guidelines tot the development of a residential area. Areas which have a potential for producing significant environmental effects have been Identified and addressed. 2. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rule Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 0 COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS March 24, 1995 COMMENT: "We believe that a Department of the Army permit may be required for this proposed residential development because of the potential impact the project may have on wetlands located on the property. Near the center of the parcel is a wetland that apparently has been drained and cultivated in the past. If this wetland is classified as a "farmed wetland' by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (Soil Conservation Service), it would be regulated, as would the wetland in the southeast comer of the parcel, by the Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The individual to contact regarding the classification of this farmed basin is Mr. Edward Musielewicz, District Conservationist, at (612) 757-4221. If the wetland area in the center of the parcel is a "farmed wetland" and it would be impacted by the project and/or the wetland basin in the southeast comer of the parcel would be impacted by dredging and/of filling, even at a later phase of the development for stormwater storage purposes, an application for a Department of the Army permit should be submitted to our office for review." RESPONSE: Mr. Joe Wittsey, District Conservationist, with the Wright County Soil and Water Consevation District (SWCD) was contacted regarding this issue (Mr. Musielewicz works for D another District). The Wright County SWCD conducted a site visit on April 3 to determine the presence of wetlands on the site. Their review, transmitted in a letter from Mr. Mark McNamara, Resource Conservationist, indicated the following: "In regards to the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) our on-site review revealed one large wetland does exist in the very southeast comer of the project site. The remaining property has no wetlands which would be regulated by WCA. Therefore, as long as no wetland impacts are proposed for the area in the southeast comer of the property the proposed project would not require a WCA permit. Please note that ponding does occur in early spring on parts of this property, especially in the southwest comer of the project site. The ponding is temporary however measures should be taken to assure this ponding does not pose a problem for the proposed housing sites." In a telephone conversation with Mr. Gary Elftmann of the Army Corp of Engineers, he explained that if the project intends to utilize the wetland in the southeast corner of the property for stormwater storage, a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers would likely be required. Based on the information obtained through the EAW, it appears that the developer (Tony Emmerich Construction) will need to obtain permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Wright County SWCD for this project. II .�ENVRUI.I.n:AWWI)NnCE1.11Y10EAWC9)kl u MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH March 15, 1995 COMMENT: "We have a concern about the close proximity of the proposed holding pond in the proposed industrial park to Monticello Well No. 4. To insure the groundwater quality of Monticello Well No. 4 in the future, we suggest that a water table observation well be installed between the holding pond and the closest point to Monticello Well No. 4. With the cooperation of the Monticello water operator, we recommend that you conduct a test to determine if pumping Monticello Well No. 4 causes a change of water level in the observation well. To do this, we recommend Monticello Well No. 4 be pumped for approximately 24 hours. If there is a drop in the standing water level in the observation well, then the municipal well may be including recharge from the area of the proposed pond. If this is demonstrated, we would recommend that an impervious liner be installed under the holding pond." RESPONSE: The Minnesota Department of Health expressed a concern regarding the proximity of the proposed holding pond to Monticello's Well Number 4. To address this concern, the City will install, as part of the development contract, a monitoring well to determine if there is a hydraulic connection between the proposed holding pond and Monticello Well No. 4. If a connection exists, options will need to be considered, including installation of a liner as part of the developers contract. No grading n the affected area will be allowed until the determination is made with regard t the liner. The City could also decide to forego the installation of the well and require the developer to install a liner in the holding pond as part of the initial pond construction. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY March 6, 1995 COMMENT: "The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency offers the following general comments for your consideration during project implementation. We recommend that energy and water conservation measures be implemented. Energy conservation measures may include the installation of sky lights, glass blocks, energy-efficient sensors, and energy efficient insulation. Water conservation measures may include the installation of toilet dams, low-volume or waterless toilets, faucet aerators, and low -flow shower heads. The implementation of just a few of these conservation measures has the potential to result in significant savings. We recommend the use of recycled materials and environmentally -sound products during construction. Items made from recycled materials may include subflooring, carpet board/underlayment, carpeting, insulation, wallboard, and ceramic tile. Environmentally -sound construction products include items that are water-based or made with natural ingredients (i.e., beeswax, carnauba wax, natural oils, chalk, plant extracts and plant gums). There are a number of "green" products available, including paint thinners, varnishes, wares, cleansers, polishes, spackles, and adhesives." RESPONSE: None. II.%ENVRUTA.IEA WUAOIJMCEI.gW)CW.A WCrrM 0 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES March 27, 1995 COMMENT: "Items 10 and 12 correctly indicate the presence of wetland resources at this site which is currently used for agricultural purposes. Based upon the information provided in the EAW, it appears that Wetland B may meet protection criteria of the Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA). If this is the case project -related effects to the weland must follow sequencing, (i.e., avoidance, minimization, compensation) even if the site is currently being farmed and there is no wetland vegetation present. If the area would support wetland vegetation under normal circumstances, (absence of farming in this instance), then it is still considered as a wetland under WCA. Farmed wetlands are not exempt from WCA if they are being conv rted to a non- agricultural use. The Wright County Soil and Water Conservation District is the local governmental unit (LGU) for WCA implementation for this project's location; please contact Kerry Saxton (612) 682-1933 for further information in this regard. Item 12 states regarding Wetland A, "However, as future phases are added this wetland will likely be used for stormwater storage purposes," and this is not likely to "adversely affect the character of the wetland'. It is incorrect to assert that conversion of Wetland A to a stormwater pond will not affect the character of the wetland. This type of conversion degrades the affected wetland by increasing nutrient an sediment loads, and by changing the frequency and extent of water level changes due to rainfall events, both of which can affect wildlife that use the pond. We strongly recommend pretreatment of all project -generated stormwater runoff through the creation of stormwater basins onsite prior to discharge to wetlands." w RESPONSE: As indicated in the response to the Army Corps of Engineers letter, it appears that the developer (Tony Emmerich Construction) will need to obtain permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Wright County SWCD for this project. In addition, as discussed in the EAW, development of any stormwater detention ponds must comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.) general stormwater permit program and the National Urban Runoff Program (N.U.R.P.). n:tet+vauu.kEAWuaormcr:t utociwwrntr Lo� 03. 29. 95 oe 16wb4 „09" Ae00C pO2 "-- () UNITED BTATU ENVIRONlIElRAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 8 77 WEBTJACKSON BOULEVARD CHICAGO. IL 60600-5590 f - ME -19J IM : 6 HECtiVED COMM &�. eJeffrey IAAR 08 1995 6 Associates, Ina. 100 Park Place East Nies Ron GmikidQiQ 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, Minnesota $5416 Dear Mr. Lutz: The O.B. Environmental Protection Agency has received the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on the proposed construction project. Unfortunately, due to limited resources, we are unable to review this projects however, we offer the foliwing general comments for your consideration during project implementation. We recommend that energy and water conservation measures be Implemented. Energy conservation measures may include the installation of sky lights, glass blocks, energy-efficient lighting, automatic light timers, insulated window, occupancy sensors, and energy efficient insulation. Water conservation measures may include the installation of toilet dams, low-volume or waterless toilets, faucet aerators, and low -flow shower heads. The implementation of just a few of these conservation measures has the potential to result in significant savings. We recommend the use of recycled materials and environmentally - sound products during construction. Items made from recycled materials may include subflocring, carpet board/underlayment, carpeting, insulation, wallboard, and ceramic tile. Environmentally -sound construction products include items that are water-based or mads with natural ingredients (", beeswax, carnauba wax, natural oils, chalk, plant extracts and plant gums). There are a number of "green• products available, including paints, thinners, varnishes, waxes, cleansers, polishes, speckles, and adhesives. Please feel fres to contact our Agency for information on Chess products. 03. 29. 96 09: 19AM +OUN A8MOC P03 He appreciate the opportunity to review this project. If you have any Questions, please contact Holly Mirick of my staff at (317) 353-6704. Sincerely, ehirl Hitehall, Chief Planning and Assessment Branch Planning and Management Division 0 SC� Minnesota Department of Health Division of Environmental Health 925 Delaware Street Southeast P.O. Box 58040 Minneapolis, MN 5545940040 (612) 6275100 March 15, 1995 Mr. Jeff O'Neill Assistant City Administrator MwdoeUo City Hag P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, Minnesota 5538-9245 Dear Mr. O'Neill: This letter reviews the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the IUein Farms develop- ment project in Monticello, Minnesota We have a concem about the dose proximity of the proposed holding pond In the proposed industrial park to Montoetlo Well No. 4. To Insure the groundwater quality of Monticello Well No. 4 In the future, we suggest that a water table observation well be Installed between the holding pond and the closest point to Monticello Well No. 4. With the cooperation of the MonUcallo water operator, we recommend that you conduct a test to determine it pumping Monticello Well No. 4 causes a change of water level In the observation well. To do this, we recommend Monticello Well No. 4 be pumped for approximately 24 hours. If there Is a drop In the standing water level In the observation well, then the municipal well may be Inducing recharge from the area of the proposed pond. If this is demonstrated, we would recommend that an Impervious Uner be Installed under the holding pond. From the County Well Index Information, it appears that there Is at least one domestic wag (No. 136613) which is located adjacent, or very near, the water course downgradlent from the holding pond. We are also maned with the protection of the water In that private well so we are enclosing a photocopy of the well Information for your review. It you have any questions, please contact either Mr. Bruce Olsen at 627-5167 or Ms. Betty Wheeler at 627.5491. Sincerely, Patricia A. SloomWm Director PAB:BW:RM:tvs Endoswe M CC" "PC I Lmh EA kP*W U" NO. CO T -R -S QUAD ELEV USE DPTH AQU D2BR FBRK LUNT NO3 DATE SACT DATESWEL D .� --- --------------- .--- .--- -.- ---- ---- --.- ---- ---- ----- ------ ----- ------ ---- - 136613 86 121-25-11AAC 138D DO 95 D 51 1 .........•........................................................... MINNESOTA COUNTY WELL INDEX. UN.NO./C0. 135613/85 NAME EYE, ART COUNTY WRIGHT T/R/SEC. 121/25/14AAC ELEVATION: FT.( DIAM. IN. STATUS ACTIVE ADDRESS , MN QUAD(7.5): MONTI CELLO CWI/WL: NO CWZ/WC: NO USE DOMESTIC DEPTH 95 FT. CASED FT. DEL/DS WHPA CONTACT: CORE/CTTNGS/GP.: ENTERED: 1988/01/17 UPDATED: 1992/03/09 DRILLED: 1977/03/23 DEPTH D: 95 FT. GROUT : YES DNR PAN: DATE NITRATE BACTERIA SOURCE SWL ELEV SOURCE ---------- ------- -------- ------- ----- ..-. ------- 1977/03/23 51 27181 ..................................................................... 0 0 Council Agenda - April 10, 1995 Coasideratiogof auorovina 6na1 Plat and a0gothm deyelooment agreement - Slein Fame residential subdivision (J.O.) The final plat and development agreement will be placed on the agenda for the regular meeting scheduled for April 24, 1995. Council Agenda - 4/10/95 8. Pensidgmlion of a Molution aoceotlna bids.ilvvariline Qoatrgct, and ordering improvement - Klein Farms resideatial subdivision. lmiect 98-02C. 0.O., B.W., J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROLT : Bids were received and opened on Friday, April 7, 1996, at 10:00 am. at the City offices. Thirteen responsible bids were received ranging from $1,097,583 to $1,403,905. The engineer's estimate for the project was $1,097,582, and the feasibility report construction cost was $1,174,384. The project is not proposed to be awarded until the Council meeting of April 24, 1895. At that time we will have evaluated the proposed costa in greater detail and will provide a summary of those anticipated costs. Initially it does appear that the low bidder has frontrluded his bid to increase the coat of the sanitary sewer which directly affects the City's share of the total share of the project costa. A better description of the anticipated costs will be provided on April 24. The developer has indicated an interest in dealing with the contractor prior to the contract award to start the grading operations. He has indicated that he would be willing to strike a separate deal with the contractor that would make him responsible for any coats should the project not be awarded. The bid extension and bid tabulation will be provided on April 24 at which time the project is proposed to be awarded. No action is requested at this time. Council Agenda - 4110/95 10. Council Uadate—Outlot A. Country Club Manor. There has been little change regarding this topic since the last meeting on this topic; therefore, for the sake of efficiency, you are provided a copy of the agenda supplement from the previous meeting. As you recall, this item was tabled on March 27, 1995, because David Hornig was not in attendance. Please note that he was informed by phone but not by letter that Council would be discussing the item on March 27, 1995. He told me that he regretted missing the meeting and that he would have attended had he been given a written reminder. On Monday, I sent him a note asking him to give me a written response to the terms of the sale as drafted on a preliminary basis by city staff. I asked to have his response by Wednesday this week. As of Friday, I have had no response. Therefore, I have no idea to what extent he supports the terms outlined in the attached item. _ t>n 1 lr w� O Ii Council Agenda - 4110/96 Considergpon of adontiva terms of sale - Oatlot A. Country Club M (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you recall, a few weeks ago Council directed City staff to complete negotiations with David Hornig on the sale of Outlot A, Country Club Manor. Stall' met with Hornig on two separate occasions to discuss the matter. We have made progress but have not "settlers" on terms at this time. However, we feel that discussions have come along far enough to justify placing this item on the agenda, hereby bringing it to a head. Council is asked to review the terms proposed below and present it to Hornig as a "take it or leave it" proposal or direct staff to negotiate further with Hornig or withdraw the land from the market. The basic terms of the staff proposal are as follows: Purchase price. The original purchase price was $282,000. Due to the fact that it has taken almost a year since the original deal was struck and no development has occurred, it is recommended that 7.646 interest be added to the cost of the land for the time period from June of 1994 to the time that it is expected that the land will be sold. This interest expense amounts to $21,160 which could be added to the total cost creating a new purchase price of $303,160. Bien Revenue. This city currently obtains approximately $8,860 per year in sign revenue for the billboards on the site. The purchase agreement should require that the signs be allowed to remain on the portion of the site unaffected by the phased development. The revenue from the signs should remain with the city until the signs are taken down. Land payment. The payment of the principal amount for land used in development must occur at the time of development. In other words, when the first phase is developed (4 acres) the land included in this phase would be paid for at the time of development. Up until the time of development, the developer will make interest payments to the city at a rate of 74496. The interest payment would be adjusted based on the land remaining after each phase of development. Council Agenda - 4110195 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve terms of sale concepts above. I am not sure to what extent Hornig will support the terms above. It is my understanding that he may expect to get the sign revenue as part of the deal. It is my view that his original proposal did not include reference to obtaining the sign revenue; therefore, this money should remain with the City. In our discussions, Hornig did support the concepts under item N3 above. He is willing to make interest payments to the City to retain the land. I am not sure if he is willing to pay the higher land price under item til above. 2. Motion to withdraw the property from the market. There are factors at work that have developed since the original deal was put together that could cause Council to rethink selling the property at this time. For instance, the rate of new housing starts continues to increase which is placing additional pressure on the city to upgrade the wastewater treatment plant. Development of an additional 74 housing units as proposed by Hornig will use additional wastewater treatment plant capacity that the City might otherwise wish it had available for single family housing development. One way to preserve capacity would be to wait to allow development of Outlot A until after the upgraded wastewater treatment plant is online. Land values continue to increase in the area. During the sale delay period, a property near the site that is zoned for both multi -family and business uses sold at a price approximately twice the value per acre that Hornig offered in the original proposal. Therefore, it is likely that the City will reap a higher price for the land if it elects to wait and sell the land later. It is true that the City has holding costs associated with keeping the land. Annual holding costs are estimated at $21,160 if we assume a 7Vj% rate of return. To offset this cost is the sign revenue which amounts to $8,860 year. Council Agenda - 4110/95 Motion to modify terms of sale as outlined above based on additional input from the developer. As noted above, the developer may not support all of the terms outlined under alternative #I. Council may wish to modify the terms above based on additional input from the developer. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Hornig had a chance to tie up the land a year ago and elected to delay obtaining control of the land until his financing came through. During this delay, factors have come into play that could serve to modify the City's position with regards to the sale of the land. Therefore, it is our recommendation that the City hold on to the land at least three more years for reasons outlined under alternative 02. It would be our second choice to provide Hornig with a "take it or leave" option as outlined under alternative Ol. At a minimum, the City should seek terms that provide the City with a good financial return along with control over the property as it is developed. None. Council Agenda - V10195 11. �nsideralion of establishing marketing strategy for the Eastwood Knoll subdivision. (J.O.) An update on this agenda item will be provided at the Council meeting on Monday night. As you know, Orin Thompson and Vic Hellman both provided a purchase offer for the land. In addition, it appears that Tony Emmerich may make a proposal. It is suggested that we take two more weeks to collect and analyse proposals to purchase Eastwood Knoll in its entirety. Council Agenda - 4/10/95 12. Consideration of purchase of single electronic water meter flow recorder. W.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Along with the expansion of our wastewater treatment plant, City staff has looked at the current sewer hookup charges and how they relate to actual peak usage per unit. Currently, the City of Monticello uses a base of 250 gallons per day, maximum use, for a single residential hookup. We use a formula in many instances to determine the number of units a specific commercial or industrial user should have. Since we rarely have peak use information and read water meters only every three months, we don't have any information from any users on peak usage per day. In addition, we sometimes get complaints from users regarding the water meter readings. Once in a while, a major user will have a leak and/or a malfunctioning appliance which causes an extremely high bill. The Water and Sewer Superintendent often spends a great deal of time assisting these people in tracking down their internal problems so that we can justify the meter reading and the bill. Last year at the Minnesota Rural Water Seminar in St. Cloud, we came across a device which straps on to a water meter with a velcro strap and records the actual rate of flow going through the water meter. This information can easily determine the rate of a leak as well as time of the leak, but it can also determine peak usage to be used for determining sewer hookup charges and capacity needed in the sewer system and lift stations themselves. We tested one of these unite in Monticello last year and felt that it would be a very useful tool for the City of Monticello to have, especially in our growing community and considering the proposed expansion of our wastewater treatment plant. The specific device is a Meter -Master System III, Model 100 Rate -of -Flow Recorder. The recording device comes with the necessary software so that reports can be generated on our existing computers at the public works facility. The unit is easily adaptable to our water meters used within the community and comes complete with a two-year warranty. We placed an amount of $6,100 in the 1995 budget anticipating this purchase. The cast of the unit, software, carrying case, and extra life battery is $6,685.93, which includes sales tax, and can be purchased from WaterPro, a firm in Eden Prairie that the City has done business with for years. To the beat of our knowledge, this is the only system that is readily adaptable to our meters and is currently available. 0. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The first alternative would be to authorize purchase of the Sensus Meter Master from WaterPro for $5,685.93. Council Agenda - 4/10/95 The second alternative would be not to authorize a purchase at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMEND4UM. It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Sewer and Water Superintendent that the City Council consider the purchase of the Sensus Meter Master as outlined in alternative Nl. 1). SUPPORTING D6M: Quote from WaterPro; Copy of brochure from Meter -Master. A QUOTATION FOR THE CITY OF MQPCELLO . Mtn Qj,l DESCRIPTION LM TOTAL PRICE 1 SENSUS METER MASTER #100 W/ACC $2,825.00 52,825.00 1 METER MASTER III SOFTWARE $2,000.00 $2,000.00 0 CARRYING CASE $0.00 0 EXTRA LIFE BATTERY Qla-w $0.00 0 CONVERTER FOR GEAR DRIVE METERS $650.00 $0.00 0 SENSUS SRH.SRM CMPD ADAPTER $550.00 $0.00 0 HERSEY MHR MODIFIED GEAR TRAIN $195.00 $0.00 TOTAL $4,825.00 4 m •oo f 5245 q2- S'p1�ss ax '340 � THAN _YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND CONSIDERATION, TODD BREDESEN I Row Recording Doesn't Get Any Easier Push Button Operatlon - No PC Required In Field Feetwes Patented Magnetic Sensor Universal CompatiblUty No Meter Alteration Compact and Portable Easy Operation Submersible and Securable r,` ': I 7--,! 1 Demand Monitoring Proper Meter Sizing Customer Rate Structuring Leak Detection Customer Service Conservation Programs •¢+o •use mnsarwa� r o t r rA• �..Mti ti -may � a•+ opffatim • Compatible with all meter types. Compso size fin inside residential meter boxes. • Quick. two mimue set-up. • Strap -on senor togs meter's magnetic pulse count without any meter alteration. • Easy push bunan open tuon. Recording toggles on/off to storo up to 20 records prior to downloading. • Flashing LED verifies recording accu- racy based on preset meta.peciflcasons. • Cumulative volume may be checked while recording without intertuping tor. • Data is validated by comparing Meter - Mauer volume to beginning and ending meter readings. • Easy to use system software. Compatible with generic hardware and disk opiating systems, • Reports generated in standard ASCII format for graph generation aM export to other databaso programs. • Imemal, rechargeable batteries. External batteries. AC. or solar power may be used to extend recording time. • Accesumes include modems for remote operation and adaptor for use with non• magnetic melon. Me••s�IYM U- I r • u, • e u. u rr sw� For 60 years, METFR•MASTPRs have been used for resolvtng water use and ran disputes. Misting in teak detection, sizing meter in•ullatdons and other applicaticm, Proper mean sizing results in Iowa capital expenditures and added income through accurate billing and use registration. Today. this U vital to bah seller and consumer. METER -MASTER instrumaro pay for themselves many times torr through increased revenue. In fan. they often pay dwir coat the flrn time used. Unit price includes instrument, semis table. RS232 cable, external battery/charger cable. internal batteries. battery charger and Operating manual. P. S. BRAINARD A COMPANY P.a am xe, awoKpw . taw J•r•ar awns VOL 6L741I111) PAX ai f-WA3Oa 0— Conned Agenda - 4/10/95 13,onsidp_rq#og of to reauestti,for a JemporgE gp:tale liquor lic gnse for Ducks Unlimited banaust and Riverfest. Annlicant Monticello Lions Club. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Monticello Lions Club will be providing the concession services for the Ducks Unlimited Banquet scheduled for May 9 at the Monticello Roller Rink and also will be serving concessions at the Riverfest scheduled for July 9, 1995, in Ellison Park. In past years, the City Council has issued a one -day non -intoxicating beer license for both events and also a setup license for the Ducks Unlimited Banquet. This year, the Lions Club has requested the City issue them an on -sale liquor license for each of these events so that they can also sell wine coolers in addition to strong beer. In both cases, they do not intend to actually sell liquor products other that wine coolers but would still require the set-up license for the Ducks Unlimited Banquet. A few years ago, the state statutes were changed to allow municipalities the ability to issue temporary one- to three-day on -sale liquor licenses to charitable organizations. Previous to this change in the law, municipalities were not allowed to grant temporary on -sale liquor licenses and could only issue non -intoxicating liquor licenses and set-up licenses. The Lions Club is the first to actually request the on -sale liquor license on this temporary basis. Since this is the first request that we have had for this on -sale liquor license, the Council should also establish a daily fee if you are in agreement with issuing the license. As a reference, the one -day non -intoxicating beer license has previously been $10 per day, and the set-up license is $25 per day. As a suggestion, if the Council is in favor of issuing the temporary on - sale liquor licenses, I would suggest the fee be a minim= of $25 because of the greater flexibility the organization would have in products they could sell. As in all cases, the applicant should be required to provide proof of liquor liability insurance, which the Lions Club has indicated they would be doing. It should be pointed out that even though state statutes do allow communities to issue temporary on -sale liquor licenses, it is up to each individual city to determine whether they wish to do so. If the Council does not feel it is necessary, you can choose to deny applications and/or just issue non -intoxicating beer licenses. Council Agenda - 4/10/95 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Council could approve the issuance of an on -sale temporary one -day liquor license and a one -day setup license for the Ducks Unlimited Banquet and a one -day on -sale liquor license for the Riverfest Celebration July 9 as requested. The approval should be contingent upon the Lions Club providing proper proof of liability insurance coverage and contingent upon payment of the required fee to be set by the Council. 2. Council could deny the request for an on -sale liquor license but agree to the issuance of a non -intoxicating beer license for both events and a setup license for the Ducks Unlimited Banquet. Under this option, the Council has chosen not to allow temporary on - sale liquor licenses but continue to allow non -intoxicating licenses only. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The stats is not aware of any problems with the Lions Club for previous years with licenses covering these events. As far as whether an on -sale license should be issued by the Council, staff does not have any reason to oppose this request, but it becomes a matter of policy to be set by Council. State statutes do allow communities to issue these licenses, so it is a matter of whether the Council is in agreement with the state statute. D. SUPPORTING DATA: License application for Ducks Unlimited Banquet. LOatltltt welds owd 4 Fwd. if an a tft& r.a. 0mm*@. 612295.1404:9 2/ 2 Dan Gr0NUID! Map LLx WMR Numme CRY !► O n► OArM t _ 9 CIMo CHOMP G rutrpila Awe" ' Aad t_J9.s9E72cYt/ Avg Ali' IgtW/Kf�10 /t4 6 o GL�itJ �nT,d AG�NA/ A1o�ufiC�Rle9 Atipl{p �o .Bar v.�s�_am cEZce nt At sf��2 MAC ** tO N— mn+yet fa Yttatiwp WAM wwonl Its*. pati tM nevo end mObw et tluUOm Moww� 0 �0 the arvitp. AJ0 PimLr _TD C4Zf2 SrRON6B4 CooLP�s n I w it tM m" - tw.v attuor tlt00ty & tmpm pPill*, Mt e..ttr� nr�N Mt1 tmamt d owvtp. 4p" wwwrna t• na w�rrootaY► 1iC3: MoM"'�Gt:2[O AGta'hJ�V � • • •.� /OOI riOQ APP1bMAL CRY OP OM APPf1DvfO CRY PQ AMOUNT Ucem OATEp OM MI PAM APPMM UDUM COH1+t10L OMCT" t110N4urdORYt Lam DORM ttMau thMw "Pa DOM w'M OorObowta a Me � �Coti two tlM rbMtl YpnM A twr SWIM i1'!t W h wnrwM M Ub tlgrlM, puMM ro tru Dry WrY h lttttt:OOttvt (MtDq we "T. I" i 3-29-95 : 3:52N : FORWARD TEOMOGY- SE\T BY TTI I vsaooA tal�m hillravaU oapaitl 4M of Pupae Sauey 1 UOUOR CONTROL DIVISION IN 6th 8l 6_ St. Pout. MN 65101 (612) ^-"4430 TOD (6+2) 297.2100 APPUCATWN AND FERIIJIT FOR A t is i DAY TtM MARY an -MU UMM LCD= LOatltltt welds owd 4 Fwd. if an a tft& r.a. 0mm*@. 612295.1404:9 2/ 2 Dan Gr0NUID! Map LLx WMR Numme CRY !► O n► OArM t _ 9 CIMo CHOMP G rutrpila Awe" ' Aad t_J9.s9E72cYt/ Avg Ali' IgtW/Kf�10 /t4 6 o GL�itJ �nT,d AG�NA/ A1o�ufiC�Rle9 Atipl{p �o .Bar v.�s�_am cEZce nt At sf��2 MAC ** tO N— mn+yet fa Yttatiwp WAM wwonl Its*. pati tM nevo end mObw et tluUOm Moww� 0 �0 the arvitp. AJ0 PimLr _TD C4Zf2 SrRON6B4 CooLP�s n I w it tM m" - tw.v attuor tlt00ty & tmpm pPill*, Mt e..ttr� nr�N Mt1 tmamt d owvtp. 4p" wwwrna t• na w�rrootaY► 1iC3: MoM"'�Gt:2[O AGta'hJ�V � • • •.� /OOI riOQ APP1bMAL CRY OP OM APPf1DvfO CRY PQ AMOUNT Ucem OATEp OM MI PAM APPMM UDUM COH1+t10L OMCT" t110N4urdORYt Lam DORM ttMau thMw "Pa DOM w'M OorObowta a Me � �Coti two tlM rbMtl YpnM A twr SWIM i1'!t W h wnrwM M Ub tlgrlM, puMM ro tru Dry WrY h lttttt:OOttvt (MtDq we "T. I" i Council Agenda - 4/10/95 14. ConsidQration of Arbor Dav Proclamation and observance for F ridav, Anri129.1995. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Last year, as part of our efforts toward reforestation and citizen awareness of the value of planting trees, the City of Monticello Council declared April 29, 1994, as Arbor Day. A small celebration and ceremony was held in Ellison Park and a tree was planted. The City of Monticello has met the requirements for the "I'ree City U.S.A. Program" for several years. The City met the requirements for 1994 by having an organized tree board (park board) or department, a community tree ordinance, and a tree or forestry program which is supported by at least $2 per capita. By proclaiming an Arbor Day observance, the City completes its requirements for the Tree City U.S.A. Program and is eligible for the Forestry Grants Program. We all know the benefits of planting trees for shade and beauty for the next generation. I would like the City to again consider proclaiming April 28, 1995, as Arbor Day and again hold a small tree planting ceremony in one of our parks. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The Brat alternative is to proclaim Friday, April 28, 1995, as Arbor Day and observe it by having a small tree planting ceremony in one of the parks. 2. The second alternative is not to proclaim Arbor Day for 1995. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City Council proclaim Arbor Day observance as outlined in alternative #I. Copy of the proclamation. PROCLAMATION WHEREAS. Minnesota's forest treasures were a significant attraction to early settlers because of their usefulness and the beautiful environment they providedr and WHEREAS. trees are an increasingly vital resource in Minnesota today, enriching our lives by purifying air and water, helping conserve soil. and energy, creating jobs through a large forest products industry, serving as recreational settings. providing habitat for wildlife of all kinds, and making our cities more liveable] and WHEREAS, human activities such as construction damage and pollution, as well as disease and insects, threaten our trees, creating the need for concerted action to ensure the future of urban and rural forests in our state, country, and worlds and WHEREAS. each year on the last Friday in April --Arbor Day --the people of Minnesota pay special attention to the wonderful treasure that our trees represent and dedicate themselves to the continued health of our state's stock of trees+ NOW. THEREFORE. I. Brad Pyle, Mayor of the City of Monticello, do hereby proclaim April 28. 1995, to be ARBOR DAY and the month of May 1995 to be ARBOR MONTH In Monticello. Minnesota. Further. I urge all citltens to become more aware of the importance of trees to their well being. to participate In tree planting programs that will ensure a green Minnesota in decades to come, and to plant, nurture. protect, and wisely use Minnesota's great treasure of trees. IN WITNESS WREREOF. I have hereunto set my hard and caused the Seal of the city of Monticello to be affixed this tenth day of April in the year of our lord One Ttwusmrd Nine Hundred and Ninety-five. Mayor D Council Update - 4/10/95 Senior Housbw Alliance Board of Direetorq. (R.W.) At the previous meeting, the Council indicated that any two of the following individuals would be acceptable candidates for council appointment to the Senior Housing Alliance Board. The individuals to be contacted were Arve Grimamo, George Phillips, and Opal Stokes. Opal Stokes and Arne Grimsmo have indicated a willingness to serve on the Board of Directors on behalf of the City. Unless the Council indicates otherwise, these appointments will be confirmed INFORMATIONAL ITEM April 10, 1999 011ie Koropchak, HRA Executive Director At the April HRA meeting, HRA members accepted the resignation of Ben Smith as a member of the HRA. An advertisement will be published in the Monticello Times this week, advertising for interested individuals to fill the commission seat vacated by Mr. Smith. It is the intent of the HRA to interview candidates at their May 3 meeting. To be consistent with City policy to advertise and interview candidates for a vacated commission seat and since, no City Councilmember site on the HRA and the Council appoints the HRA members, would the City Council be interested in joining the HRA on the 3rd of May for a joint interview? Or does the Council prefer an independent interview? Or would the Council prefer appointing two Councilmembers to participate at the May 3 HRA interview? Or is the Council not interested in interviewing individuals for the NRA vacancy? The HRA hopes an individual can be appointed by the City Council on May S. Also, the HRA acknowledged the letter of resignations addressed to the Monticello Senior Housing Alliance, Inc. from Al Larson and Brad Barger. The HRA members appointed Steve Johnson and Ben Smith to replace Larson and Barger as representatives of the HRA on the Alliance Board. 0 CITY OF MONTICELLO MONTHLY BUILDING DEPARTMENT REPORT MONTHBLG.WKI MONTH OF MARCH 1995 PERMITS 6 USES This Same Month Last veer This Year PERMITS ISSUED M" March Lest Year To Data To Date RESIDENTIAL Number 17 17 25 29 Valuation (858.500.00 $649.100.00 $828.700.00 $1,319=00 Fees $8,17125 14.767.38 $6.69224 $13,280.98 Surcharges $428.25 $323.30 $482.85 $658.97 COMMERCIAL Number 4 4 8 7 Valuation $90.00000 9240,500.00 $271.000.00 $103.000.00 Fees $1,004.00 81,885.67 $2.192.17 $1211.00 Surcharges $14.75 $119.50 $135.00 $50.75 INDUSTRIAL Number 0 2 3 1 Valuation $0.00 $34,900.00 $38.400.00 9575.000.00 Fees $000 6540.35 $575.35 $3,736.43 Surcharges $0.00 $17.45 $1920 $287.60 PLUMBING 0.90 10 10 15 18 Fees $466.00 $243.00 $381.00 $81800 Surcharges $5.00 95DO 8750 $9.00 MECHANICAL Number 11 NA NA 17 Few 941000 $858A0 Surchage $5.50 $8.50 Other OTHERS Number 0 1 0 2 Valuation $0.00 $000 Fees $0.00 $10.00 $200.00 90.00 $n,hn TQTAL S PARMITS 41 ;4 09 74 TQTAL VALUATION $94950000 $82450000 1123810000 $1097.30000 TOTAL ff IQ,411 SZ.44@.2@ _� q,79- $20.073 41 141TAL SURCHARGES $483.60. 1485.75. $825.05 11.014,$2 CURRENT MOKTH ' FEES I��MQF,R 0 DATE PEFIMIj 7L1TURE Nhhhlhbg P4Rrdl Surcftpr05 vowfor This Yeas Last Ywh Str1ploFamlly 9 $8.038.76 $411.55 $823,100,00 14 12 Duplex 0a Wdlbramay 0 0 Commerew t $951.00 13823 172500W 1 0 InNmtlial 0 1 0 Ron. Oarapss 0 0 swe 0 0 PLOC map 0 0 ALTERATIOWREPAIR Dwolungs 8 $432.50 116.70 6n.400 00 15 12 Commorclot 3 $213,00 $850 $17.500,00 0 e trh0uselsl 0 3 PLUMBING AA Typm 10 $460,00 $3.00 11 13 MECHANICAL 0 Al Types 11 $410.00 $350 17 M_ ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SaAMMWQ Poob 0 0 Docks 0 1 MOVINO PERMIT 2 0 TEMPORARY PERMIT 0 0 OFMOUTION a TOIAI8 42 _$10.411 n •rip $g4p orhnm 74 60 MONTHBLG.WKI