City Council Agenda Packet 01-12-1998
.
.
.
AGEN A
REGULAR MEETING - MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 1 ,1998 - 7 p.m.
Mayor: Bill Fair
Council Members: Clint Herbst, Brian Stu pf, Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes.
A. Approval of minutes of the re lar meeting held December 8, 1997.
B. Approval of minutes of the spe . al meeting held December 22, 1997.
C. Approval of minutes of the spe 'al meeting held January 5,1998.
3. Consideration of adding items to the genda.
Citizens comments/petitions, request, and c~mplaints. Do," a (r1AIJ(<:'~- f^u~ ,1)' d
~Q+'}\O-I" rh~\I\l{,.-(U~ f2rV_f>-e^>duWl t)tJ OV\l\VV\"-,,,.~ C'iiL.
bonsent agenda. /
4.
5.
A. Consideration of resolution su porting Minnesota Department of
Health study of mobile home p rks.
B. Consideration of an amendme t to the official zoning map of the city of
Monticello to change the zonin district classification of a property
located in the medium density residential (R-3) zoning district to
single and two-family resident al (R-2) zoning district. Applicant, City
of Monticello.
C. Consideration of a request for conditional use permit within the PZM
zoning district to establish a c mmercial office use. Applicant, Dan
Goeman.
D. Consideration of a request for conditional use permit within the PZM
zoning district to allow three r more business signs on a commercial
building. Applicant, Kathy F oslie.
Consideration of an ordinance amendment establishing trucking and
trucking services as an interi use in a B-3 zone. Applicant, Danner
Trucking.
E.
.
{
r1f~~
(jr\
.
.
Agenda
Monticello City Council
January 12,1998
Page 2
F. Consideration of an interim use permit allowing operation of a
trucking company in a BM3 zone Applicant, Danner Trucking.
Consideration of an ordinance a ending Chapter 3, Section 2[F], of
the Monticello Zoning Ordinanc establishing regulations for the
installation offences. Applican , City of Monticello.
G.
H. Consideration of sponsoring gra t fund request by the Monticello
Community Band to the Centra Minnesota Arts Board.
I. Consideration of approval of ch nge order #9 revised for Project 93-
14C, Wastewater Treatment PI t Expansion.
J. Consideration of annual highw y maintenance agreement with Wright
County.
6. Consideration of items removed from he consent agenda for discussion.
7.
Public HearingM-Consideration of vaca ing Marvin ~oad. Applicant, Danner
Trucking. C Ii 'I fj S
8. Public Hearing--Consideration ofvaca ing a portion of Hart Boulevard.
Applicant, Monticello-Big Lake Hospi al.
9. Consideration of accepting bid and au horizing sale of tax forfeited
residential lots.
lOA. Review design and finance alternativ s for the training and community
center for presentation at the corom ity meeting at Little Mountain
Elementary School on January 20,19 8.
lOB. Consideration of a resolution authori 'ng request that Mark Olson sponsor a
bill allowing the City of Monticello to onduct a referendum on establishment
of a sales tax.
11. Consideration of annual appointment for 1998.
12. Consideration of selecting internet ho e page service provider.
13. Approval of bills for the first half of J uary,1998.
14. Adjournment.
1\o"~\"~ ,\, ~c"," Q; ,,'(...s
.
.
.
MINUT S
REGULAR MEETING. MONT CELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 8, 1997 . 7 p.m.
Members Present: Bill Fair, Clint Herbst, B . an Stumpf, Roger Carlson, Bruce
Thielen
Members Absent: None
2. A.
Councilmember Clint Herbst s ted that he did not feel a consensus
was reached regarding the pro osed levy increase for 1998; however,
other Councilmembers noted t at a consensus was reached for
presentation at the Truth in Ta ation public hearing.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLIN HERBST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN
STUMPF TO STRIKE THE SECO D TO LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE
MINUTES. Voting in favor: Cli t Herbst, Brian Stumpf. Opposed: Bill
Fair, Bruce Thielen, Roger Car son. Motion failed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRU E THIELEN AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO APPROVE THE M NUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
HELD NOVEMBER 17,1997, AS ITTEN. Voting in favor: Bruce
Thielen, Roger Carlson, Bill Fir. Opposed: Clint Herbst, Brian
Stumpf. Motion carried.
B.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROG R CARLSON AND SECONDED BY BRIAN
STUMPF TO APPROVE THE MI UTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
HELD NOVEMBER 24, 1997, AS ITTEN. Voting in favor: Roger
Carlson, Brian Stumpf, Bill Fir, Bruce Thielen. Abstaining: Clint
Herbst. Motion carried.
c.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BR STUMPF AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO APPROVE THE INUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
HELD NOVEMBER 24,1997, AS WRITTEN. Motion carried unanimously.
Pa 1
~Pr--
.
.
.
3.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
A.
B.
position.
4.
None.
5. Consent agenda.
Councilmember Clint Herbst request d that item 5D be removed from the
consent agenda for discussion.
A.
B.
Recommendation: Approve t e interim use permit amendment with
the following conditions:
1.
The interim use permit
Extension of the use of t
purposes beyond the te
through re-application
ill terminate on August 31,1998.
e subject property for public school
ination date may only be granted
the City.
2. The District agrees to s ripe the existing parking lot in a way
which maximizes the p ved area for efficient parking supply
and circulation.
3.
The District agrees to e pand parking areas at the direction of
the City. The City will irect expanded parking based on the
City's observation ofpa king demand which causes the use of
on-street parking at an time.
Pag 2
cil~
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
4.
The use of the subject pr perty will be for alternative classroom
use during normal school hours only and not for any other use.
5. The District may occupy he building during remodeling only at
the direction, and under onditions identified by, the Building
Official.
6. The District shall make very effort to avoid permanent changes
to the building which, in the opinion of the Building Official,
would not be characteris ic of an industrial use.
7. Thirteen of the total 19 0 -street parking stalls are reserved for
use by the building's low r level building occupant.
8. All applicable Building ode requirements are satisfactorily
met.
Approval is based on the findin that the proposed use will not
interfere with the City's long-r nge objectives of encouraging
industrial development in the rea (due to the temporary nature of the
permit and the minimal altera ions to the property.
C.
Decision 1: Approve the zoni g ordinance amendment to establish
government and public utility tructures as conditional uses in the B-3
zoning district based on the fi ding that the conditional allowance of
government and public utility tructures in the B-3 district is
consistent with the purpose of the district and comparable with other
allowed uses in the district.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDM NT NO. 300.
Decision 2: Approve the rezo 'ng of the 5.0-acre parcel ofland located
east of Highway 25 between 1- 4 and 7th Street from I-I to B-3 based
on the finding that the rezoni g is consistent with the provisions of the
comprehensive plan and is in haracter with the area.
SEE ORDINANCE AMEND ENT NO. 301.
Pag 3
~Pr
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
.
Decision 3: Approve the condit onal use permit to allow the
establishment of a government r public utility building in a B-3
zoning district with the followin conditions:
1. The City approves the re uested zoning ordinance amendment
and rezoning.
2. The City Engineer provi es comment and recommendation in
regard to site access.
3. The submitted grading p an is subject to review and approval by
the City Engineer.
4. The following landscapi -related conditions are satisfied:
a. The Austrian Pine tree located in the northwest comer of
the site is relocate so as not to obstruct vehicular
visibility for vehic es exiting onto 7th Street.
b.
The Dwarf Burni g Bushes located along the west side of
the parking lot ar shifted westward to allow vehicle
overhang and sno storage.
.
c. Off-street parkin and loading areas are screened from
view of Interstate 94 from the south.
d. The landscape pI n is modified to identify seeding
specifications.
5. The site plan is revised 0 identify a trash handling location.
The trash handling are shall be screened from view of
neighboring properties nd adjacent rights-of-way.
6. All site signage complie with applicable City requirements.
7. The site plan is revised 0 illustrate exterior lighting locations.
All lighting shall be arr nged to deflect light away from any
residential use zone an from public streets.
.
9.
Any mechanical equip ent erected on the roof of the principal
structure is screened so as not to be visible.
8. No outside storage is pe 'tted.
Pag 4
,;J.1Jr
.
.
.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
10. The City reserves the rig t to require the construction of
additional off-street par ing stalls if the need arises.
Approval is based on the findin that the use is consistent with the
provisions of the comprehensiv plan and is compatible with uses in
the area.
Commission. Recommendati n: Appoint Robbie Smith to the
Planning Commission position.
Recommendation:
Authorize preparation of a Wa er Resource Management Plan for the
city of Monticello, which woul be paid out of the trunk storm sewer
fund, at a cost of $40,000.
interceptor. Authorize preparation of a
feasibility report addressing t e alignment and construction for
proposed southeast intercepto at an estimated cost of $9,500.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE TH ELEN AND SECONDED BY BRIAN
STUMPF TO APPROVE THE CONSEN AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED,
EXCLUDING ITEM 5D. Motion carrie unanimously.
6.
5D.
In the Assistant Administrato 's staff report, Council was asked to
consider entering into a contr ct with Ankeny Kell Architects for
services relating to design an construction of the Community and
Training Center. Approval of the contract would enable the project to
proceed through phase I desi , which was scheduled for completion in
early February. During phas I design, AKA would gather
information from the commu ity and prepare schematic layouts and
detailed cost estimates of the ntire facility, including a water park
and ice sheet. Near the end 0 phase I, schematics would be presented
o't~
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
.
to the public along with alterna ives for financing the water park and
ice sheet. After obtaining feedb ck on alternatives, Council would then
consider authorizing phase II d sign and possibly consider calling for a
referendum on water and/or ice The cost to proceed with phase I was
estimated at $160,000.
Councilmember Clint Herbst st ted that he would like more
information on how the facility ould be funded and how operations
and maintenance would be fun ed prior to spending $160,000 on
blueprints.
Mayor Fair noted that hiring t e architect is part of the process that
will provide answers to those d other questions. Assistant
Administrator Jeff O'Neill add d that the main goal is to determine
how the site would be used, the square footage, the cost to operate, etc.
Until that process is complete, t would be hard for the financial
consultants to define what ope ational expenses would be.
.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTIO WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF TO
APPROVE THE CONTRACT WIT ANKENY KELL ARCHITECTS FOR
DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE T NING AND COMMUNITY CENTER
CORE FACILITY ONLY, WITH T E WATER PARK AND ICE SHEET
REMOVED UNTIL ADDITION INFORMATION IS RECEIVED,
CONTINGENT ON REVIEW BY HE CITY ATTORNEY. Clint Herbst
seconded the motion but noted that he is not in favor of going ahead
without answers to his questio s. Voting in favor: Brian Stumpf,
Clint Herbst. Opposed: Bill F ir, Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen.
Motion failed.
Resident Tom Bose asked whe her the taxpayers would have an
opportunity to say whether or ot they want a community center. It
was his view that the City ma be paying architect fees for a building
that the taxpayers don't want.
Mayor Fair responded that th core facility is being built in
conjunction with the National Guard; however, a referendum on the
ice sheet and water park rem ins a possibility. It was his view that it
was worthwhile to look at Ion -term issues and space needs for the
future and that once preparat on and study of the facility is complete,
a presentation would be made to the public.
.
Councilmember Clint Herbst tated that the public should be able to
vote on whether they want a ommunity center.
Pag 6
~Pr
.
7.
.
.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN AND
SECONDED BY ROGER CARLSO TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH
ANKENY KELL ARCHITECTS A PRESENTED, CONTINGENT UPON
REVIEW BY THE CITY ATTORN Y. Voting in favor: Bruce Thielen,
Roger Carlson, Bill Fair. Oppo ed: Brian Stumpf, Clint Herbst.
Motion carried.
Auditor.
City Administrator RickW olfsteller r ported that the proposed assessment
roll contains three delinquent accoun s, two for blight mowing charges and
one for grading plan review of a lot. I was recommended that the delinquent
accounts be placed on an assessment oIl for certification in 1998 at an
interest rate of 8%.
Mayor Fair opened the public hearin
There being no comments from the p blic, Mayor Fair closed the public
hearing.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STU PF AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO ADOPT THE ASSESSME T ROLL FOR THE DELINQUENT
CHARGES AS PRESENTED. Motion cried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 97-60.
8.
Rettinl:" the 1998 tax levy.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller eported that at the initial public
hearing held on December 3, there w s general agreement to keep the
proposed tax levy at the $3,883,013 ount, which would result in an
estimated 26.9% increase in dollars be collected in 1998. Approximately
6.3% of the increase was for non-deb items, while the balance was due to
increased debt service requirements ecause of the wastewater treatment
plant expansion. The proposed levy f $3.8 million was $134,000 less than
the maximum allowed by the Depart ent of Revenue.
W olfsteller went on to note that the egislature made a major change in tax
capacity valuations of commercial, i dustrial, and residential properties,
which resulted in a 14% reduction i tax rates for commercial and industrial
properties shifted to residential. Ho ever, because the School District
received additional state aid, many roperty owners would see no increase in
taxes for 1998.
Pag 7
~Pr
.
.
.
9A.
Mayor Fair opened the public hearin .
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
There being no public comment, May r Fair closed the public hearing.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HER ST TO REDUCE THE LEVY BY $90,000
TO APPROXIMATELY A 23.5% INCREA E OVER 1997 AND BORROW FROM
RESERVES, WHICH WOULD BE PAID ACK WHEN THE CITY BONDED FOR
LARGER PROJECTS. It was Herbst's . ew that by borrowing from reserves,
the City would have more homes to h lp pay the debt later. In addition,
Herbst suggested that the EDA repa a portion of their funds at this time.
Motion died for lack of a second.
Mayor Fair noted that the City would be paying interest on bonds, and
current reserves may need to be used for projects that come up during the
year.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THI LEN AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ETTING THE TAX LEVY
REQUIREMENTS FOR 1998 AT $3,883, 13. Voting in favor: Bruce Thielen,
Roger Carlson, Bill Fair, Brian Sturn f. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Motion
carried. SEE RESOLUTION 97-61.
Assistant Administrator J eft' O'Neill eported that Bill Hoffman, owner of the
Monte Club, submitted petitions for nnexation of the Monte Club and
extension of sanitary sewer and possi ly water service to the facility. The
requests stem from problems with th sanitary sewer system serving the site.
The total cost of connection to city sy terns was estimated at $68,750, with
$6,250 for trunk sanitary sewer servi e, $46,500 for the sewer access fee, and
approximately $16,000 for the cost to extend the line from its current position
to the Monte Club site. O'Neill also oted that Mr. Hoffman requested that
1997 rates be used and the total amo t be assessed for ten years.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE TH ELEN AND SECONDED BY BRIAN
STUMPF TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION QUESTING ANNEXATION OF THE
MONTE CLUB, ADOPT A RESOLUTIO ACCEPTING PETITION FOR PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING FEASIBILITYIDESIGN, ESTABLISH THE
CONNECTION FEE AT THE 1997 RAT S, AND ALLOW THE OWNER TO PLACE
THE ENTIRE COST OF THE CONNEC ION ON HIS TAXES AS A SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT. Motion is contingent n the owner paying the estimated cost
to prepare plans and specifications a d conduct the bidding process. The
1997 fee structure is contingent on p oject completion in 1998. Motion
carried unanimously. SEE RESOLU IONS 97-62 and 97-63.
:1.11-
.
.
.
9.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
Assistant Administrator J eft' O'Neill equested that the Council continue this
item until the Monticello-Big Lake H spital District PUD discussion under
item #13.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HER ST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN
STUMPF TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION F VACATING A PORTION OF HART
BOULEVARD TO ITEM 13A. Motion cried unanimously.
10.
Truckin~.
Assistant Administrator Jeft'O'Neill eported that Bob Danner requested a
zoning ordinance amendment to allo a trucking use and service garage in a
B-3 zone and a conditional use permi which would allow re-establishment
and expansion of the Danner Truckin operation. The damage from the
July 1 storm to Danner Trucking, which is a nonconforming use, exceeded
50% of the value of the facility; theref1 re, according to ordinance, it cannot be
rebuilt or expanded without an amen ment to the B-3 regulations. It was
also pointed out that if the ordinance as amended to allow Danner Trucking
to operate in a B-3 zone, this type ofu e would also be allowed by conditional
use permit in all B-3 zones within the city.
At its last meeting, the Planning Co ission recommended approval of the
ordinance amendment to allow a truc ing use and service garage in a B-3
zone, which would allow Danner True ing to apply for a conditional use
permit to continue occupancy of the p operty located at Dundas Road, Cedar
Street, and Highway 25. It was their . ew that although Danner Trucking is
not commercial in nature, on a limite scale the use could be compatible with
other B-3 uses. However, because Da er did not yet have control over the
land area necessary to support the pr posed site plan, the Planning
Commission tabled his conditional use request to operate in the B-3 zone.
Another item discussed by the Planni g Commission but not resolved was
the method of limiting the size of the se to avoid a large-scale truck repair
facility occupying what would otherwi e be prime retail/commercial land.
The proposed ordinance amendment i eluded restriction of the amount of
area and location which could be devo d to storage of commercial trucks.
In the City Planner's report, it was no .ed that an interim use permit could
also be considered for Danner Truckin rather than a conditional use.
Because Danner had previously sugge ted that he would develop the site for
future conversion to a B-3 use, an inte . m use permit could accommodate
Danner's business with less possibility of other B-3 areas being used for
~~
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
heavy truck repair. Assistant Admini trator O'Neill noted that although an
interim use pennit is not typically use in cases where a significant
investment is made in the property, it . sn't a requirement; however, the
request would have to return to the PI nning Commission for a public
hearing on an ordinance amendment stablishing an interim use in the B-3
zone. City Planner Steve Grittman a ded that if an interim use pennit is
established in the B~3 zone, anyone in a B-3 zone could apply for one;
however, the City would have more co trol with an interim use pennit than
with a conditional use permit.
The Assistant Administrator asked B b Danner's attorney, Jim Fleming, if a
3D-day delay for the interim use perm t process would create a hardship.
Mr. Fleming replied that under the ci cumstances, it was his view that an
interim use pennit would be acceptab e to Mr. Danner and that he would
probably be willing to accept the 30-d y delay.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN ST PF AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO APPROVE THE ORDINAN E AMENDMENT TO ALLOW TRUCK
REPAIR BY CONDITIONAL USE PERM T IN THE B-3 ZONE. Motion was based
on the finding that the amendment w uld be consistent with the City's goals
in the Highway 25 corridor and woul be consistent with the intent of the B-
3 district. Voting in favor: Brian Stu pf, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Bill Fair,
Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen. Motio failed.
Mayor Fair requested that the applic tion fees be waived for Mr. Danner if
the Council returned the item to the lanning Commission for a public
hearing on an interim use permit.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE TH LEN AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HARING BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION TO CONSIDER AN ORD NANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING
INTERIM USE PERMIT IN A B-3 ZONE AND TO WAIVE THE APPLICATION
FEES FOR MR. DANNER. Motion car . ed unanimously.
Mr. Jim Fleming noted that his clien was willing to work with the City;
however, if the item is delayed for an ther month and the interim use permit
is rejected, his client would be forced into Court. Mayor Fair responded that
he understood Mr. Danner's position and that the Council was trying to
accommodate Mr. Danner without cr ating conflicts in all B-3 districts.
11.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN S MPF AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE A 3% COST 0 LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE NON-
UNION PAY SCHEDULE. Motion car 'ed unanimously.
Page 10
~IJ.
.
.
.
12.
annexation issues.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
This item was moved to the end oft agenda as item 15A.
13.
City Planner Steve Grittman reporte that the Monticello-Big Lake Hospital
District proposed a planned unit dev lopment to allow for expansion of
emergency services, outpatient hospi al services, the adjacent clinic, and the
Mississippi Shores senior housing fa ility.
Project Overview. The project was proposed to be phased in over a number
of years, ultimately resulting in an e panded off-site parking supply of
approximately 767 spaces contained 'n a three-level parking structure to the
west and a new parking area in the p oposed vacated Hart Boulevard right-
of-way. Access to the site was design d to be from County Road 75 at a
primary divided entrance/exit directl in front of the hospital main entrance.
Secondary access was proposed belo the hill on River Street. Emergency
vehicle traffic and storage would be r located east of the primary entrance,
and a helipad site was proposed adja ent to the main entrance. Currently,
helicopter landings/takeoffs occur at he airport and patients are transported
between the helipad and hospital by mbulance.
Project Issues. One of the primary ssues raised by the proposal was access
for the hospital and nearby propertie . City staff noted concern that at least
two access points to the facilities be r tained to accommodate emergency
needs of the facility as well as the si ificant levels of traffic generated by
the project.
Hart Boulevard. The proposed vacati n of Hart Boulevard for additional
parking raised an issue for the City's rucks hauling sludge from the
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), which would have turned west onto
Hart Boulevard and then connected t County Road 75 via the previously-
planned intersection in front of the cli . c building. With access to County
Road 75 cut off as proposed, the sludg trucks would need to find a new
route.
Planning Commission recommended at either Hart Boulevard remain open
or that it be extended eastward with t e Hospital District participating in
the cost; however, the Hospital reques ed that other alternatives be
investigated.
Page 1
OJ.fI.
. ~
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
.
River Street Access. The proposal wo d retain access to River Street from
the nursing home and from the lower level of the parking ramp, which would
shift a percentage of the hospital traffi from Hart Boulevard/County
Road 75 to River Street. This raised c ncerns of increasing traffic to a level
inappropriate for residential areas. I addition, it was proposed that a
driveway connect the County Road 75 rimary access to the River Street
secondary access, which would also pr vide exterior access to each of the
three decks of the parking ramp.
Planning Commission recommended t at the nursing home access to River
Street be maintained but that the par 'ng ramp be redesigned to provide for
top-level access only and weather-pro ected ramping. The Hospital indicated
that it wished to retain the driveway onnection down the hill but could
redesign the ramp.
.
County Road 75 Access. Access to Co nty Road 75 from the main hospital
entrance would require coordination . th the School District due to the
proposed channelization of the county road. New medians would close left
turn access to other driveway points between Washington Street and the new
intersection at the hospital entrance. The Hospital District also requested
consideration of a signal at the new h spital/school driveway intersection,
which would require a traffic study b fore the County could consider the
request.
Planning Commission recommended hat the plan provide for right-out
egress onto County Road 75 near the amp's upper level driveway at the west
edge of the project.
Helipad Location. Also of concern at he County Road 75 access was the
proposed helipad adjacent to the mai driveway, which could cause
significant congestion.
Planning Commission recommended hat the Hospital provide for an
alternative helipad location, possibly on the river side of the complex.
Setback Encroachment. The parking ramp was proposed to encroach into
both the buffer yard setback on the est and the River Street right-of-way
setback on the north.
.
Planning Commission denied the va ance request and recommended that
the west building line of the parking amp be relocated to meet the 3D-ft
buffer yard requirement. They also ecommended that the River Street
right-of-way be vacated to avoid the etback encroachments, contingent upon
retention of City easements as neces ary.
Page 12
~A-
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
.
Existinl: Utilities. Planning Commiss' on recommended that the Hospital
provide plans acceptable to the City fo relocation of the utilities on the west
side of the main hospital expansion a d that design detail be provided to the
City Engineer and public works staff i lustrating the protection of the city
storm sewer near the clinic expansion.
At the conclusion of the City Planner' presentation, City Engineer Bret
Weiss noted that there would need to e coordinated meetings with the City,
School District, and Hospital District 0 discuss payment for the realigned
County Road 75 access. Public Works Director John Simola added that
another item to address was who wou d pay to replace parking lot islands or
the helipad if the City should need to ake repairs to the existing utilities
under Hart Boulevard, or perhaps the utilities should be relocated to the
County Road 75 right-of-way.
.
Owners of the dental clinic adjacent t the hospital stated that the dental
clinic property is privately owned but has been included in the Hospital's
PUD. They questioned how patients ould access the clinic if Hart
Boulevard was vacated and what res . ctions would be placed on their
property if the PUD was approved. T e City Planner explained that the
proposed PUD affects only property 0 ed by the Hospital. If the Hospital
was unable to negotiate the purchase of parcels included in the PUD, they
would have to change their plans.
Barb Schwientek, Hospital Administ ator, noted that five years ago the
County required that separate egress s be established, one for the hospital
and one for the school, which resulte in a stub road being built from Hart
Boulevard to County Road 75; howev r, the County now requires the access
to the school and hospital to be acros from each other with a median for
better control. She stated that the H spital was working with the School and
that a traffic study was currently bei g conducted on County Road 75 to see
if signal lights would be warranted b tween the school and hospital. Once
the study is complete, the Hospital pans to meet with the City and also
involve the County. Schwientek also suggested that the Hospital be included
when the City Engineer and public orks staff discuss alternatives for the
access to County Road 75.
Mr. Tim Sessions, architect for the ospital District, added that they would
like to maintain the green space alo g the river and that MN/DOT agreed
with the proposed location of the hel"pad at the front of the site. He also
stated that the School District was i favor of and the County Highway
Department has granted approval fo the new entrance location.
.
Page 13
~~
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS ADE BY BILL FAIR AND SECONDED
BY ROGER CARLSON TO APPROVE TH CONCEPT OF THE MONTICELLO-BIG
LAKE HOSPITAL DISTRICT PUD CONT NGENT ON RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
RAISED BY CITY STAFF AND PROPER OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE PUD
CONCEPT, AND CONTINGENT ON RE LUTION OF THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY TH PLANNING COMMISSION:
(1) PRESERVE THE PROPOS D CITY STREET ACCESS FROM HART
BOULEVARD TO COUN ROAD 75 NEAR THE CLINIC
ENTRANCE, OR
(2) PROVIDE FOR EGRESS F OM THE WWTP (EAST ON THE
FRONTAGE ROAD TO AN INTERSECTION WITH CSAH 75 AND
FUTURE 7TH STREET), 0
1. THE PLAN IS REVISED TO:
(3) OTHER ALTERNATIVES URRENTLY BEING STUDIED BY THE
CITY ENGINEERING AN PUBLIC WORKS STAFF.
2. MAINTAIN THE EXISTING NUR ING HOME ACCESS TO RIVER STREET
BUT REDESIGN THE PARKING TRUCTURE TO PROVIDE FOR TOP-
LEVEL ACCESS ONLY AND WE THER-PROTECTED RAMPING.
.
3.
PROVIDE FOR RIGHT-OUT EGR SS ONTO CSAH 75 NEAR THE RAMP'S
UPPER LEVEL DRIVEWAY AT T E WEST EDGE OF THE PROJECT.
4. RELOCATE THE WEST BUILDI G LINE OF THE STRUCTURE TO MEET
THE 30-FT BUFFER YARD.
5. PROVIDE FOR A HELIPAD LOC TION ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY,
COUNTY, AND MNIDOT.
6. PROVIDE PLANS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY FOR THE RELOCATION
OF THE UTILITIES ON THE ST SIDE OF THE MAIN HOSPITAL
EXPANSION.
7. PROVIDE DESIGN DETAIL TO ITY ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC
WORKS STAFF ILLUSTRATING THE PROTECTION OF THE CITY'S
STORM SEWER NEAR THE CLI IC EXPANSION.
8. VACATE THE RIVER STREET R GHT-OF-WAY OR OBTAIN A VARIANCE
TO ALLOW SETBACK ENCROA HMENT OF BOTH CURRENT AND
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, ONTINGENT UPON RETENTION OF
CITY EASEMENTS AS NECESS Y.
.
Public Works Director John Simola r quested that the Council remove
consideration of vacating River Stre t from the concept plan because it was
added as a modification to the PUD nd needed additional study due to the
Page 14
OtFr
.
13A.
~
-
14.
.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
major sanitary sewer trunk line locate in the right-of-way. Mayor Fair
noted that the motion for approving t e concept plan was contingent on all
issues being resolved, which would in ude the question of whether River
Street should be vacated.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller re orted that the City was under the
assumption that the Hospital had opti ns or ownership of the parcels
included in the PUD and that PUDs a e not usually approved when the
property is not owned by the applican . City Planner Steve Grittman
concurred and noted that developmen could only occur after the Hospital is
in control of the parcels.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Bill Fair opened the public hea 'ng.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill r quested that, because there were
issues yet to be resolved regarding va ation of Hart Boulevard, Council table
the public hearing until alternatives fi r access to the wastewater treatment
plant were resolved and a price was n gotiated for the transfer of land.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HER ST AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC EARING REGARDING VACATION OF A
PORTION OF HART BOULEVARD UNTI ACCESS ISSUES WERE RESOLVED.
Motion carried unanimously.
Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill ported that the Planning Commission
work plan calls for reviewing the KIu as property zoning designation. After
discovering that the Edgar KIucas pr perty was being marketed for sale,
staff wanted to make sure the zoning as proper for the area. Under R-3
zoning, the site had the potential of c ntaining 300 housing units. There was
strong agreement by the Planning Co mission that R-3 development was
disfavored by the comprehensive plan particularly the amendments made as
a part of the MCP's Downtown Revita ization Plan. The Plan recommended
a concentration of higher density resi ential uses in the downtown area to
facilitate a greater market for downto n business. Multiple family uses such
as the KIucas site on the fringe of the city's developing area would not be
consistent with those objectives.
Page 5
.;L~
.
.
.
15A.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
Simola explained that the City must egin chlorinating and dechlorinating
by March 1; however, the contract do uments were ambiguous in this regard.
As a trade-off for allowing a delay, st ff suggested that A & P be required to
complete the chlorinationldechlorinat on system by March 15. Since the
existing chlorination tank is so small, the operation of the discharge from the
SBR tanks would have to be tempora 'ly modified from 5,000 gpm to 500-800
gpm for 6 weeks until the new system was complete.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS E BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO G T CHANGE ORDER #9 BY ALLOWING
ADOLF SON & PETERSON A 31-DAY E TENSION FOR COMPLETION OF THE
FIRST TWO SBR TANKS, AND A 15-DA EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF
THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, C NTINGENT UPON THEIR COMPLETION
OF THE CHLORINATIONIDECHLORIN TION SYSTEM BY MARCH 15, 1998.
Motion carried unanimously.
annexation issues.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller r ported that Monticello Township
officials requested that a meeting be et up between the City and the
Township to discuss the annexation p oposals. At the previous Council
meeting, it was suggested that a mee ing be scheduled after the Township
outlined which areas of the City's pro osal they were concerned about and
wanted to discuss further. Wolfstelle noted that he did receive a letter from
the Township Clerk that requested a eeting be established between the
City and the Township to discuss the riginal agreement proposed by the
City/Township committee but did not provide any additional background as
to what, if any of the City's counter-p oposal, was unacceptable.
The City Administrator suggested th t as an alternative to a joint meeting,
the Council could still consider autho . zing the planner and/or attorney for
both sides to meet and come up with roposals that could be brought back to
both bodies for consideration.
Councilmember Bruce Thielen noted . s concern that Township officials have
agreed to write down their concerns nd stated that their attorney would
respond in writing to the City's propo al; however, neither of those
documents have been received by the City. He agreed that, at this point, it
may be best to have the City Attorne , City Planner, and the City
Administrator meet with the Townsh p Attorney.
Councilmember Clint Herbst suggest d that the City schedule a meeting
with the Township. It was his view t at the Council should not have the
attorneys making decisions for the C uncil.
Page
.;L1r
.
.
.
Council Minutes - 12/8/97
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS E BY BRUCE THIELEN AND
SECONDED BY ROGER CARLSON TO UTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY, CITY
PLANNER, AND CITY ADMINISTRATO TO MEET WITH THE TOWNSHIP,
WITH A SPECIFIC AGENDA ESTABLIS ED, TO DISCUSS SPECIFIC CONCERNS
PRIOR TO SCHEDULING A JOINT ME TING. Voting in favor: Bruce Thielen,
Roger Carlson, Bill Fair. Opposed: C int Herbst, Brian Stumpf. Motion
carried.
16.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STU PF AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE THE BILLS FO THE FIRST HALF OF DECEMBER AS
PRESENTED. Motion carried unanim usly.
17. Other matters.
Public Works Director John Si ola reported that Tim Guimont
resigned from his position of 0 erator/mechanic and requested Council
authorization to post the positi n with the union and select a
replacement from the 120 appl cations just received for the parks
worker position.
A.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTIO WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST 0 AUTHORIZE THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR TO SELECT AN ADD TIONAL PERSON FROM THE PARKS
WORKER APPLICATIONS TO R PLACE TIM GUIMONT. Motion carried
unanimously.
B.
A special Council meeting was scheduled for Monday, December 22, at
7 p.m., to consider hiring two ublic works employees.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN
ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Page 18
D SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO
animously.
~fr
.
.
.
MIN ES
SPECIAL MEETING - MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, Decembe 22,1997.7 p.m.
Members Present: Bill Fair, Clint Herbst, rian Stumpf, Roger Carlson, Bruce
Thielen
Members Absent: None
2.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STU PF AND SECONDED BY BRUCE
THIELEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTE OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD
DECEMBER 3,1997, AS WRITTEN. M tion carried unanimously.
3.
A.
City Administrator Rick Wolfs eller noted that an offer was made to
the Post Office landlord that t e City would sell the adjacent vacant
lot. No response was received s of yet, and the City Administrator
will contact the landlord for a ecision.
B.
Consideration of Chamber auc ion donation.
C.
Update on City/Township ann xation discussions.
4.
A. Mr. Bob Harworth questioned hy Roger Carlson was still voting on
community center issues when he previously stated he would abstain.
Councilmember Carlson noted he only indicated he would abstain from
voting on any land purchase were he had a conflict of interest.
Mr. Joe Holthaus questioned i a decision had been made on whether
or not the public would be allo ed to vote on the community center.
Mayor Fair indicated that the ask force is preparing alternative
methods for financing, which ay or may not require a vote, on
amenities that could be includ d in the community center. In order to
obtain a commitment from the National Guard on the $1.5 million, the
core facility is proposed to be nanced via lease revenue bonds, which
will not require a vote.
B.
Page 1
016
.
.
.
C.
Special Council Minutes - 12/22/97
Remmele Engineering Plant anager Joel Abraham noted increased
incidents of theft of their recyc ing materials. The Police Commission
will be advised of and review t e situation.
5. Consent a~enda.
A.
Public Works Director John Si ola reported that 120 applications
were received for the position f parks maintenance worker. After
interviewing 10 applicants, To Grossnickle and Jeff Gustafson were
selected for the two vacant pos tions. Mr. Grossnickle attended St.
Cloud State University in the eld of industrial and technical studies
and has seven years of experie ce in golf course care and seven years
of experience in the landscapin field. Mr. Gustafson attended the
University of Minnesota in Cro kston majoring in Natural Resource
Conservation. He has worked or the Wright County Parks
Department for three years an has his Minnesota Tree Inspector's
License and Minnesota Pestici e Applicator's License.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLIN HERBST AND SECONDED BY ROGER
CARLSON TO AUTHORIZE THE UBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO HIRE
TOM GROSSNICKLE AND JEFF USTAFSON AS PARK MAINTENANCE
WORKERS FOR THE CITY OF M NTICELLO. Motion carried
unanimously.
6.
None.
7.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN ST PF AND SECONDED BY CLINT
HERBST TO APPROVE THE BILLS FO THE LAST HALF OF DECEMBER AS
PRESENTED. Motion carried unani ously.
Mayor Fair then closed the Council meeting to discuss billboard sign reconstruction
litigation.
Rick W olfsteller
City Administrator
Page
~6
.
.
.
MIN ES
SPECIAL CLOSED MEETING - ONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 5,1998 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Bruce Thielen, Clint He bst, Bill Fair
Members Absent: Roger Carlson, Brian St mpf
A closed meeting of the Monticello City Cou cil was convened on January 5, 1998,
for the purpose of discussion of potentialliti ation relating to a contested case
annexation proceeding.
A MOTION WAS MADE TO OPEN THE CLOSE MEETING BY BRUCE THIELEN AND
SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST. Motion carried unanimously.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN D SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO
CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING SCHED ED FOR JANUARY 12, 1998, FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE MONTH TO PROVIDE TIME FOR THE CITY AND TOWNSHIP TO
CONTINUE TO DISCUSS IDEAS SET FORTH THE OUTLINE DESCRIBING TERMS
FORAN AMENDED ORDERLY ANNEXATION GREEMENT. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Bill Fair requested that City staffi rm the property owners that petitioned
for annexation of the Council's decision to a ee to continue the hearing for 30 days.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRUCE THIELEN D SECONDED BY BILL FAIR TO
PROCEED WITH THE HEARING ON JANUAR 12, 1998, IN THE EVENT THAT THE
TOWNSHIP REPRESENTATIVES DO NOT AG EE TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS IDEAS
AS PROVIDED IN THE OUTLINE. Motion cried unanimously.
A MOTION BY BRUCE THIELEN AND SECON ED BY CLINT HERBST TO ADJOURN
THE MEETING. Motion carried unanimousl .
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant City Administrator
~C..)
.
.
.
SA
(R.W.)
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
The League of Minnesota Cities is pr posing legislation that would require
the Minnesota Department of Health 0 conduct a state-wide study of mobile
home park issues and to develop prop sed solutions for those issues. Since
the licensing of mobile home parks h s been handled by the State, but when
problems arise, cities are usually the esponsible entity in dealing with the
various issues relating to mobile horn parks, the League would like to see
legislation established that would pro . de a state-wide support system for
cities to rely on when dealing with iss es relating to mobile home parks
within their communities.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution supportin Minnesota Department of Health
study of mobile home parks.
2.
Do not adopt the resolution.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of the Admi istrator that the resolution be adopted.
With the city of Monticello having tw mobile home parks within its
jurisdiction, additional regulation an the establishment of a state-wide
support system for cities like Montie 110 would be beneficial in the long run.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution; Policy statement.
.
.
.
CITY OF
RESOLUTION #
Resolution Supporting Minneso a Department of Health
Study of Mobile ome Parks
WHEREAS, The State of Minnesota has assumed responsibility for the regulation of mobile
home parks through the Minnesota Department of Haith;
..--
WHEREAS, serious issues face mobile home par residents and their host communities related
to general living and housing conditions and public afety;
WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities is pr posing legislation which would require the
Minnesota Department of Health to conduct a state ide study of mobile home park issues and to
develop proposed solutions for these issues.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED: he ._ City Council declares
its support for adoption by the Minnesota Legislatur of the legislation proposed by the League
of Minnesota Cities requiring the Minnesota Depart ent of Health to conduct a statewide study
of mobile home parks.
Adopted this _day of
,199'
ATTEST:
CITY COUNCIL
~~ ... I
.1
2
.
.
SD-12. Mobile Home l)ark Oversight
Page 17
Issue: The State has preempted cities in the I' censing of mobile home parks and has
3
limited the authority of cities to place new regulation on established mobile home parks,
4
However, cities are responsible for dealing with the arious housing and public safety
5
challenges mobile home parks may create,
6
Response: Since the State has already take the lead, the legislature should
7
provide sufficient resources and direct the Depart ent of Health to conduct a study on
8
the condition of mobile home parks throughout th State of Minnesota. Cities and mobile
9
home park owners and residents should be involv d in the study. The results of the study
10
should be used as a basis for policy discussions re arding ways in which the State can
11
provide for increased and improved oversight of obile home parks and establish a
statewide support system for cities to rely on in d aling with the array of issues that arise
13
in mobile home parks. Outcomes of the study sh uld include:
14 .
"best practices" for the operation of mobil home parks;
15 .
recommended state regulatory changes for the operation of mobile home parks;
16 .
suggested ways cities can better address th issues presented by mobile home
1 7 parks; and
18 .
identification of mechanisms to provide as istance in financing mobile home park
19 upgrades.
SIJ-~
.
5B.
.
.
Applicant. City of Monticello. (F.P)
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
The following are excerpts from PI nning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
Staff report on this item was presente by Fred Patch. Patch explained that
the Planning Commission is requeste to re- hold the required public hearing
in response to the insufficient publica ion of this item. This item was not
published to reflect the possibility tha the property could be rezoned from
the medium density residential (R-3) oning district to the single and two-
family residential (R~2) zoning distric .
Chairman Frie opened the public hea 'ng and recognized Debbie Tibbetts of
227 Crocus Lane. Ms. Tibbetts spoke n favor of the rezoning of the Klucas
property to R-2 (single & two-family r sidential). Dan Goeman, realtor for
Mr. Klucas, made comments regardin the owner's disfavor of the rezoning to
R-2.
Hearing no other comments, Chairm Frie closed the public hearing.
Richard Carlson spoke in favor of the -2 zoning classification of the
property. Rod Dragsten expressed th t he feels that the property would more
appropriately be zoned 1-1 (light indu trial) in that the rezoning to R~2 would
likely have adverse impacts on the de elopment of the 1-2 property of Electro
Industries, Inc., to the west of the Kl cas property. Steve Grittman noted
that between R-2 and 1-2 zoning dist cts, buffer yards would be required
upon future development.
MOTION BY DICK MARTIE TO RECOM END TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
THE 20.76-ACRE KLUCAS PROPERTY, DRESSED 1980 RIVER STREET WEST,
BE REZONED FROM R-3 (MEDIUM DE SITY RESIDENTIAL) TO R-2 (SINGLE &
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) BASED ON THE FINDING THAT R-2
PROVIDES A MORE COMPATIBLE T NSITION BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS
AND THAT THE R-2 ZONING DISTRIC DESIGNATION IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTI N SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLSON.
Motion passed with commissioners D ck Frie, Richard Carlson, Dick Martie,
and Robbie Smith voting in favor an Rod Dragsten voting in opposition to
the motion.
2
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the findings nd actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above.
2. Motion to approve [some other action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
Staff recommends alternative #1 abo e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Planning Commission staff report.
.
.
3
.
.
.
C'f'.:.cy
~/I.I
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
5.
This item came before the Planning ommission and City Conncil in
December 1997. Unfortnnately, the i em was not published to reflect the
possibility that the property could be ezoned from the medium density
residential (R-3) zoning district to th single and two-family residential (R-2)
zoning district.
Previous information from the staff r port and Planning Commission
minutes are attached and remain ap licable. Planning Commission is
requested to re-hold the required pub ic hearing in response to the
insufficient publication of this item.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Move to recommend to the Cit Conncil that the 20.76-acre Klucas
property, addressed 1980 Rive Street West, be rezoned from R-3 to
R-2 based upon the finding th t R-2 provides a more compatible
transition between neighborho ds and that the R-2 zoning district
designation is consistent with he comprehensive plan.
2. Move to recommend to the Cit Conncil that the zoning request be
denied.
Staff recommends Alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A - Copy of previous staff re ort
Exhibit B - Copy of Planning Commi sion minutes as related to this item
Exhibit C - Location map
Exhibit D - Zoning map
S~--I
,
1_ j" .
COpy
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 12/02/97
9.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Klucas property along West River Stre t consists of approximately 20 acres, and is
zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential. Sin e its annexation into the City several years
ago, the site has contained an automobile junk yard, a legal non-conforming use. The
property is adjacent to an R-2 zoned neighbo hood to the east, comprised of single family
homes, and a few undeveloped lots. To the est is an industrial supply company and the
"AI-Anon" building, both zoned 1-2, Heavy Ind stria I. . To the north across West River Street
is the NSP Training Facility and the NSP at letic fields, also zoned 1-2.
At issue is whether the R-3 zoning designatio is the most appropriate land use for the site,
and if not, what zoning designation should be assigned to the parcel. -Discussions among
staff have included lower density residenti I, public/semi-public, and industrial. A brief
. summary of each follows:
Residential
R-1, Single Family. This designation woul constitute a significant change in proposed
land use, and would be less dense than the adjoining residential neighborhood. Due to
the location of the freeway adjacent to this si e, it is questionable whether a quality single
family neighborhood would result. Consid ring that one of the City's Comprehensive
Planning goals related to housing was to 100 for opportunities to encourage higher value
housing, this zoning designation would see to be inconsistent with that goal.
R-2, Medium Density Residential. This designation is the. same as the adjacent
neighborhood, and would accommodate s ngle family, twin homes, and townhouses.
Townhouses would create somewhat of a land use transition between the residential
zoning and the industrial. However, the no se concerns from the freeway would still be
present, and would likely tend to hold down alues.
.
R-3, Multiple Family Residential. This is t e current designation. The same concerns
applicable to other residential districts would pply here. Moreover, the City has stated in
its Downtown Revitalization Plan that a co centration of the higher density residential
would be best located in the central area rather than the edges of the community.
Although R-3 would appear to be a logical tr nsition on the zoning map, this site may be
poorly suited to residential development.
EXHIBIT
sa -2-
A
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 12/02/97
Public/Semi-Public
One thought given to the use of this site wa an open space designation to provide local
park facilities to the nearby neighborhoods However, the size of the site exceeds any
neighborhood park needs, and the NSP At letic Fields are nearby. Montissippi County
Park already provides large, passive park sp cas to the northeast of the site. The primary
public use of this area could be to fa ilitate pathway access from the adjacent
neighborhoods to the NSP Fields.
Light Industrial
As noted above, the zoning to the west a d to the north is 1-2, Heavy Industrial. The
rezoning of the subject site to an industrial classification could be considered as being
compatible with the current and future Ian uses in the area. An industrial designation
would take better advantage of the freeway exposure, and not be damaged by the noise
issues. The primary issue would be managi g the buffer between the existing residential
neighborhood and the new industrial ?one The City's bufferyard ordinance has been
established to accomplish that objective. In this area, the bufferyard separation could
possibly be used for the pathway connectio mentioned previously.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1.
Motion to approve the application r a rezoning from R-3 to a lower density
residential district, based upon the Indings that the rezoning would further the
objectives of the Monticello Compre ensive Plan by discouraging multiple family
residential development at the edge of the community.
2.
Motion to approve the application for a rezoning from R-3 to a light industrial district,
based upon the findings that the r zoning would further the objectives of the
Monticello Comprehensive Plan by pr viding for increased. choice in industrial land
development, and is compatible with industrial uses to the west and north.
3.
Motion to table action on the applicatio for a rezoning to permit additional study of
the proposal.
4.
Motion to deny the application for a rezoning based upon the findings that the
current R-3 zoning is most appropri te for the site, given the need for land use
transition in the area.
S-S-3
.
.
.
. ,
C.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Planning Commission Agenda. 12/02/97
Although there are reasons for considerin any of the proposed (or present) zoning
designations, planning staff recommends app oval of the rezoning to light industrial, such
as the 1-1 A District. This district would allow i dustrial uses which can take advantage of
the freeway exposure of the site, but would Iso require quality industrial buildings in the
development to minimize negative visual impacts on the adjacent neighborhood.
Moreover, a future buyer/developer would b required to install a bufferyard which could
accommodate a public pathway as well, acc mplishing an open space need in the area.
Finally, residential uses of any density in this I cation are not recommended since they will
be impacted by the freeway noise, mini izing their quality and value. The City's
Comprehensive Plan encourages efforts to promote higher end residential uses which
would be unlikely to develop in this location.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
-
Exhibit A - Zoning Map
SfJ-tj
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes/12-2-97
9.
Steve Grittman, City Planner, repo ed the Klucas property along West River
Street consists of approximately 20 cres and is zoned R-3, Multiple Family
Residential. Since its annexation in 0 the City several years ago, the site has
contained an automobile junk yard, legal non-conforming use. The
property is adjacent to an R.2 zoned eighborhood to the east, comprised of
single family homes, and a few unde eloped lots. To the west is an industrial
supply company and the Al-Anon bIding both zoned 1-2 Heavy Industrial.
To the north across West River Stre t is the NSP Training Facility and the
NSP athletic fields, also zoned 1.1.
The issue is whether the R-3 zoning esignation is the most appropriate land
use of the site, and if not, what zoni g designation should be assigned. The
~ICP plan is to build higher density 'n the downtown area.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrato , reported that this parcel has been on
the Planning Commission work pI to review and because O'Neill was
aware of the property being put on t e market for sale he placed it on the
Planning Commission agenda for co sideration.
Chairman Frie opened the public he 'ng.
Mr. Tim Fourie, attorney for prope yowner, stated the property is a junk
yard and had been for many years. t was his understanding the properly
was brought into the City as R3 an more land in this zone is needed. He
added there is a natural berm that locks the area from the freeway. If the
property is zoned industrial it will be required to allow for buffering and
pathway access. This might be cons'dered condemnation.
O'N eill replied that R3 uses are aIlo ed in all PZM, PZR, and B2 with a CUP
there does not appear to be a shorta e of R3 zoned property.
Steve Tibbets, neighbor, explained at they had put a lot of elbow grease in
their house and he would like it zon d residential instead of industrial.
Bill Seegfelds, owner Electo 1ndust 'es, stated he would like to see the area
rezoned industrial. It was original oned industrial and then changed to R3
in the 1980's.
JC'"
.~
Dan Goeman, Realtor, inquired as t the difference between I-I and I-lA.
EXHIBIT B
,.-
.
Planning Commission Minutes/12-2-97
_.___.... ~ _,.,__.__~ ... _._'........~.~.~. ~.,~ ~ ~ '_.~._ _..'. .__.__~,..~,.~_~,~ ,_..~__~~_._~,___._._.....__'........~I_~_......_.~~._~ _~...~.,'......"'_.__.~..._"'.....-,.._,.....,..........
......____ll.'lLt.\.~"IIlIIIbIIIII''''~.QiIt.~11,~:..::..o:;"'~;'~'_'
Grittman explained that the basic di erence would be that I-IA is basically
the same as business campus except or building material standards and
green space.
Chairman Frie closed the public hea . ng.
The Commissioners discussed the co tour of the land and the surrounding
area. Because of the natural berm tough the area it would be an
appropriate place for residential dev lopment however, there already are
industrial sites in this area.
Dan Goeman, inquired if the item co ld be tabled until he has a chance to
check the market.
.
O'Neill replied that if the parcel is re oned to R2 it would still allow 8 unit
buildings on this site with a conditio al use however, higher density would
not be allowed.
ROD DRAGSTEN MADE A MOTIO TO APPROVE, SECONDED BY JON
BOGART, THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING FROM R-3 TO Il-A, based
upon the finding that the rezoning w uld further the objectives of the
Monticello Comprehensive Plan by p oviding for increased choice in
industrial land development and is c mpatible with industrial uses to the
west and north. Voting in favor: Rod Dragsten, Jon Bogart. Voting against:
Dick Frie, Richard Carlson, Dick Ma ie. Motion failed 2 to 3.
After a short discussion, DICK MAR IE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE,
SECONDED BY RICHARD CARLS N, THE APPLICATION FOR A
REZONING FROM R-3 TO R-2, bas d upon the findings that the rezoning
would further the objectives of the Monticello Comprehensive Plan by
discouraging multiple family residen ial development at the edges of the
community. Voting in favor: Dick M ie, Richard Carlson, Dick Frie, Jon
Bogart. Voting against: Rod Dragst n. Motion passed.
.
56 ...10-
.""
""
,
,~ ".:';,.,:.
,I
r
""
~,
,
. Consideration of an amendment t the Official Zoning Map of
~. N T Y ~ the City of Monticello, to change t e Zoning District classification
___ ~ of a property located in the Medi m Density Residential (R-3)
Zoning District to Single and Two Family Residential (R-2) Zoning
District.
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
._'L-,
'.
ow
..
---,,-- \' \ \ -- 7::'
\ i</
i \ //
i .'/
\ /
\\
\ ,
" \
, I
i l
./
,f ..
:~\"
.
\
\.
,\
Ii
\
\:::2:::'
\
J
./
,
I
1
1
I
I
.."\
-.. ,-~_. .:.!....'~---............-......._.'.,.
>~..~.:.2:~.,~~
"
,
.'
.
"
0"
.
,
I
I
I
I
.'.
1 :
,:
I
/' \
---
/
...
~I,~ '.
..,~ HI T :~_~
.
.
-----
"
"'.
".'
",
~
'~--
I
I
KLUCAS
\
~ -,
ROP RTY
\
\
R2
.
EXHIBI D
.
.
.
5C.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
The following are excerpts from PI nning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
Staff report on this item was presente by Steve Grittman. Steve Grittman
reviewed a new site plan made avail a Ie by Dan Goeman at the meeting.
The new site plan proposed to elimina e the second curb cut and driveway on
the west side of the front of the prope y. The one-drive entrance proposed
on the east side of the front of the pro erty would be 24 feet in width and at
least 5 feet set back from the side pro erty line. Steve Grittman stated that,
as the subject property and adjacent p operties are all within the PZM
zoning district, no buffer yards are re uired; however, the parking lot must
be screened from adjacent residential roperties. Steve Grittman presented a
letter to the commission from Mr. & rs. Seestrom of 11474 Clementa Ave.
NW, who wrote in favor of the conditi nal use permit provided a wooden
basket weave screening fence is instal ed on the west property line to screen
their property from the parking lot.
Chairman Frie opened the public hea . ng and recognized Dan Goeman.
Mr. Goeman presented his plan regar 'ng the change in use of the property
and stated that he would prefer to ma ntain the existing two curb cuts and to
not install concrete curb and gutter a ound the parking lot and drive areas.
He felt that omission of curb and gutt r would help to maintain the
residential character of the area.
Hearing no other comments, Chairma Frie closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carlson expressed con ems regarding the residential
character of East Broadway and woul like the commission to give further
consideration to the future residentia or commercial redevelopment of the
area along East Broadway. Chairma Frie recognized Joe Holtaus.
Mr. Holtaus stated that he would pre er to see the residential character of
the area maintained and felt that cur and gutter would be commercial in
nature. The commission was in favor of deferring the installation of required
concrete curb and gutter. Fred Patch suggested that on-site bonding may
provide a surety to enable the curb a d gutter to be deferred and yet provide
some guarantee of future installation if the commercial use of the property
would continue for more than two ye s.
4
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
MOTION BY DICK FRIE TO RECOMM ND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BE ALLO D FOR A COMMERCIAL OFFICE IN
THE PZM ZONING DISTRICT BASED PON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED
USE WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH E COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE
AREA AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLO ING CONDITIONS:
1. A PLAN FOR LANDSCAPING D SCREENING OF THE PARKING AREA
FROM ADJACENT RESIDENT USES IS PROVIDED, TOGETHER WITH
THE APPROPRIATE LANDSCAP SURETY.
2. ONE OF THE EXISTING 12-FT URB CUTS AND DRIVEWAYS IS
ELIMINATED, AND THE OTHE IS WIDENED TO A TWO-WAY, 24-FT
WIDE DRIVEWAY.
3. THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CER IFIES THE STRUCTURE AS MEETING
THE BUILDING CODES APPLIC LE TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE
BUILDINGS.
4.
AN ON-SITE SURETY IN THE F RM OF A PERFORMANCE BOND OR
LETTER OF CREDIT MUST BE ROVIDED TO THE CITY
GUARANTEEING THAT WITHI TWO YEARS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF THIS CONDITIO AL USE PERMIT, CONCRETE CURB
AND GUTTER WILL BE INSTAL ED AROUND ALL DRIVEWAY AND
PARKING AREAS AS REQUIRE BY CITY ORDINANCE.
.
Motion seconded by Rod Dragsten. otion passed unanimously.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the findings and actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above
2. Motion to approve [some othe action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
Staff recommends alternative #1 abo e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Planning Commission staff report.
.
5
.
.
.
COpy
Planning Commission Agenda - V6/98
8.
Mr. Dan Goeman has submitted a req est for a conditional use permit to
remodel and occupy a former single fa ily structure in the PZM district for
commercial office purposes. The pare 1 is on the north side of Broadway
between Dayton and Washington Streets, just west of the hospital campus
and across Broadway from the Montie 110 High School. All property adjacent
to this location is zoned PZM, with th majority ofland use being single
family residential.
In the PZM zoning district, office uses for commercial services, including real
estate, are allowed by conditional use permit, subject to a condition that
where abutting a residential district, pecifically R-l, R-2, R-3, or PZR, a
bufferyard is included per ordinance quirements. Parking facilities are
also governed by a conditional use pe mit, requiring landscaping and
screening of abutting residential uses As a result, a landscaping plan
should be prepared which illustrates permanent vegetative screen (fenced,
if appropriate) which shields the park'ng area from abutting residential uses.
The ordinance does not require that t e driveways be screened; however, low
plantings along the west edge of the p operty would help this use more
compatibly coexist with the residenti 1 neighbor on that side. There is
adequate room to provide a substanti landscaping treatment with the trees
in that area.
With regard to parking and access, th lot is currently served with two 12-ft
wide driveways which are proposed t loop around the building to access the
parking stalls. The lot is approximat ly 120 ft in width. According to the
zoning ordinance, properties are pe itted one curb cut per 125 ft of street
frontage. The current layout represe ts a non-conforming condition and may
be corrected as a condition of the CD . A preferable design would substitute
a single 24-ft wide curb cut and drive ay in place of the two existing 12-ft
wide drives. Either side of the house ould accommodate this re-design,
although the east side would avoid tr e removal and would better protect
residential uses to the west. The par ing and driveway areas are required to
be surrounded by concrete curbing. here is an exception to this requirement
only for industrial-zoned property.
6
5e ../
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
The structure has approximately 1,50 sq ft of floor area divided between two
floors. This would result in a parking requirement for office use of ten
spaces. The proposed facility illustrat s ten spaces, including one
handicapped accessible space, in confi rmance with the zoning ordinance
regulations.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the conditio al use permit for a commercial office
facility in the PZM zone subjec to the conditions listed in Exhibit B,
based upon a finding that the p oposed use would be compatible with
the comprehensive plan for the area.
2. Motion to deny the conditional se permit for a commercial office
facility in the PZM zone, based upon a finding that the proposed use
would be inconsistent with the eighborhood and that the non-
conformities on the site preclu e the property's use as an appropriate
commercial site.
3.
Motion to table action on the c nditional use permit pending
additional information.
.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed re-use of the existing si gle family house along East Broadway
appears to be in conformance with th comprehensive plan objectives for the
Broadway neighborhood in that the chitectural character of the district
would be preserved under this propo al. Staff views the application
positively with some modifications to the site plan. These include screening
of the parking area as required by or inance and consolidation of the two
12-ft curb cuts into a single 24-ft cur cut on either side of the building. With
these changes, the request would me t all zoning ordinance regulations.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A - Site plan
Exhibit B - Proposed conditions of ap roval
.
7
S-e-2.
} /t;;
"
~l::l
a . g
,
Q~ ~
0, ~
... I
J
.~ , eJ
,
".
..
o
,
:.'i
It\
.
1
~-
II
,J
\
i
J
.1
S,'
2
\
,
~ I
~ ".1
~ !
~ . i
.I
I
I
I
i
J
I
..
~(
~.
.
1/
.
'I11t
. !I
..
",
.'
/
UIST/II(
Zl' 'CE
a.~.
,"'" ,
- .2'".0<:;> a ~".
-"l/':;t:> "Dt/1I ...."....
.
:-l
G'i
_..~
<:: I~IU.
'j..
IS'$ilr&4~
,. /no PId J4.JQ
~c~
??..f.?--
~..et!=-e ;.
7
\
\
\
~
~
"
/D N
\:
4n'{
~ ~\l
$I ~\
~ \ ~
~ "
~ ,,'
" \ ~ \
G~: ~~
, '" ~
,~. '"
ts' '" l
. . '\I
\.. . .
."l '.
\\
~"&J$11":'
0&1114
~
~
.
..
I
I
J
J./'i"
711 t:.
S~""" 7
Exhibit A · Site Plan
.1
-3
~
.
.
.
CONDITIONS OF CONDITION USE PERMIT APPROVAL
1. A plan for landscaping and screening f the parking area from adjacent
residential uses is provided, together . th the appropriate landscape
security.
2. One of the existing 12-ft curb cuts an driveways is eliminated, and the other
is expanded to a two-way, 24-ft wide riveway.
3. The Building Official certifies the str cture as meeting the Building Codes
applicable to commercial office buildi gs.
Exhibit B - P oposed Conditions of Approval
'l' _ J I
'lIP.-.- 7
.
.
.
5D.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
. .
(F.P.)
The following are excerpts from PI nning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
Fred Patch presented the staff report or this item. It was explained that city
ordinance allows only four signs to be erected on the property. Two of the
signs must be product identification s gns and two must be business
identification signs. Both business ide tification signs are to be wall signs.
One business identification sign may e a pylon sign and the other must be a
wall sign. No more than 100 square fi et of sign may be erected on any wall,
and the pylon sign must not exceed 5 square feet in area. It was explained
that to avoid the necessity of a varian e, Kathy Froslie must reduce the area
of proposed signs on the south wall of the building by 17 square feet, and
those signs must be constructed toget er to develop consistency in design,
material, shape, and method of illumi ation.
Chairman Frie opened the public hea . ng and recognized Kathy Froslie.
Ms. Froslie explained that the "Going In Style" sign is already built and
hoped that it could be used. Mr. Patc stated that Ms. Froslie had been
considering a redesign of the "Antiqu s" sign to make it a neon sign, similar
to the "Going In Style" sign and 17 sq are feet smaller in size. Robbie Smith
expressed concern regarding the num er of signs and the possibility of
"clutter" in the number of signs inten ed.
Hearing no other comments, Chairma Frie closed the public hearing.
MOTION BY ROBBIE SMITH TO RECO MEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BE ALLO D FOR THE ERECTION OF SIGNS AT
103 PINE STREET, SUBJECT TO THE F LLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. ONLY THREE (3) WALL SIGNS DONE (1) PYLON SIGN MAY BE
ALLOWED.
ONLY TWO (2) WALL SIGNS MA BE BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION
SIGNS AND ONE (1) WALL SIGN MAY BE A PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION
SIGN. ONE (1) PYLON SIGN MA BE ALLOWED, AND THAT SIGN MUST
BE A PRODUCT IDENTIFICATI N SIGN TO INCLUDE A LISTING OF
AVAILABLE PRODUCTS AND SE VICES.
2.
THE TOTAL AREA OF SIGNS TO BE ERECTED ON ANY WALL OF THE
BUILDING MUST NOT EXCEED 00 SQ FT IN AREA AND THE PYLON
SIGN MUST NOT EXCEED 58 SQ ARE FEET IN AREA.
6
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
3.
AS A NEW SIGN IS BEING ERE TED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
BUILDING, THE SIGN PLAN M ST BE REDESIGNED TO DEVELOP
SIGNS FOR THE SOUTH SIDE 0 THE BUILDING THAT ARE
CONSISTENT IN DESIGN, MAT RIAL, SHAPE, AND METHOD OF
ILLUMINATION.
4. ANY FUTURE ALTERATION OF SIGNS MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH
THIS CONDITIONAL USE PER IT. PRIOR TO ALTERING ANY SIGNS,
THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST PLY FOR AND RECEIVE A SIGN
PERMIT FROM THE ZONING MINISTRATOR. THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR MAY FIND AT THE APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT
WITH THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ISSUE A PERMIT FOR
THE ALTERATION, OTHERWIS THE APPLICANT MUST RECEIVE
FURTHER AMENDMENT TO TH S CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
Motion seconded by Dick Martie. M tion passed unanimously.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the findings and actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above
.
2.
Motion to approve [some othe action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
Staff recommends alternative #1 abo e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Planning Commission staff report.
.
7
COpy
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
9.
In the Performance Zone - Mixed (PZ ) zoning district, a conditional use
permit is required for the erection of igns where there are three or more
business uses in one building and th building is not considered a shopping
center.
The Riverstreet Station building loca ed at 103 Pine Street houses at least
five separate businesses. In 1995 th Planning Commission approved a
conditional use permit (see attached) to allow "...a sign system with three or
more businesses...". Kathy Froslie, t e current owner of the building, is
requesting that the existing conditio al use permit be amended to include
changes to the approved "sign syste "and allow four (4) wall signs and one
(1) pylon sign:
.
Sign Message New or Sign Area Sign Location Sign Type
Existin
"Going In Style" New 85 Sq. Ft. South Wall Business Identification
"Antiques" Existing 32 Sq. Ft. South Wall Product Identification
"River street Antiques" Existing 32 Sq. Ft. North Wall Business Identification
"Lee's Tai Quon Do" Existing 52 Sq. Ft. North Wall Business Identification
Sign Messages
New 01"
Existin
Sign Area
Sign location
Sign Type
"Lanners Constnlction",
"Antiques", "Real Estate"
Existing
100 Sq. Ft.
East Yard
Business & Product
Identification
NUMBER AND TYPE OF SIGNS
LOWED:
.
A combination of wall signs and a py on sign may be allowed under City
Ordinance Section 3-9, [E] 2, (b), ii., 'Option B" (attached), Kathy Froslie has
proposed to erect five signs. Only fo are allowed by ordinance without a
variance, Only one of the four allow d signs may be a pylon sign rather than
a wall sign.
8
0/)-1
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
The Riverstreet Station property fron s on two streets, East River Street and
Pine StreetJHwy 25. Therefore, the to al number of business identification
signs allowable on the building is two (2). Business identification signs may
be erected on only two walls of the bu'lding.
In addition to the business identificat on signs, two (2) product identification
signs may be allowed. Product identi cation wall signs may be erected on
only one wall of the building.
The total number and type of signs w uld be in compliance and allowed if the
existing pylon sign is interpreted to b one of the two allowed product
identification signs, the other produc identification sign is a wall sign, and if
the three business identification sign proposed are all combined onto two
wall signs.
TOTAL ALLOWABLE SIGN AREA
.
Wall Signs --Total allowable wall si area for any building facade facing a
public street is determined as 10% of he gross silhouette area of the front of
the building. Based on the size of thi building, each building facade upon
which signs may be erected may hav up to 100 sq ft of wall signs. At 117 sq
ft, the total sign area proposed for th south wall of the building exceeds the
allowable area of 100 sq ft and must e reduced by 17 sq ft.
Pylon Sign -- Total allowable area fi r the pylon sign is 58 sq ft based on the
191.86 total lineal feet fronting on H y 25. The existing pylon sign is
approximately 40 sq ft in area.
SIGN PLAN REVIEW:
While the existing signs have been p eviously permitted by the City, the
signs do not appear to be highly cons stent in design, material, shape, or
method of illumination as required b the ordinance. Kathy Froslie has
indicated a willingness to re-design t e sign plan by making the signs on the
south side of the building of the sam type. The Commission may choose to
require that the sign plan being pro osed by this application be re-designed
to develop greater consistency as req ired by ordinance, and to be more
compatible and consistent with the ity's Comprehensive Plan and the
Downtown Revitalization Plan.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
.
1.
Move to recommend to the Cit Council that the issuance of the
conditional use permit be app oved for the erection of signs at 103 Pine
Street, subject to the followin conditions:
9
ob -2-
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
1.
Only three (3) wall signs and one (1) pylon sign may be allowed.
Only two wall signs may e business identification signs and
one wall sign may be a p oduct identification sign. One pylon
sign may be allowed, an that sign must be a product
identification sign to incl de a listing of available products and
servIces.
2. The total area of signs to be erected on any wall of the building
must not exceed 100 sq in area, and the pylon sign must not
exceed 58 sq ft in area.
3. As a new sign is being e ected on the south side of the building,
the sign plan must be re designed to develop signs for the south
side of the building that re consistent in design, material,
shape, and method of ill ination.
4.
Any future alteration of igns must be consistent with this
conditional use permit. rior to altering any signs, the property
owner must apply for a d receive a permit from the Zoning
Administrator. The Zo ng Administrator may find that the
application is consistent with this conditional use permit and
issue a permit for the al eration, otherwise the applicant must
receive further amendm nt to this conditional use permit.
.
2. Move to recommend to the Cit Council that the issuance of the
conditional use permit be deni d for reasons to be determined by the
Planning Commission.
Staff recommends issuance of a con itional use permit for 103 Pine Street
according to Alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Exhibit A - Copy of applicable ordin nce, Section: 3-9 [E] 3
Exhibit B - Location map
Exhibit C - Copy ofland survey of 1 3 Pine St., Lots 11 & 12, Block 52,
Original Plat
Exhibit D - Copy of Sign Plan for 10 Pine St. as submitted by applicant
Exhibit E - Photographs of signs at 03 Pine St.
Exhibit F - Copy of 1995 Planning Commission minutes
s-b-3
(b) For building in which there is one (1) or two (2) business
uses within he B-2, B-3, B-4,
I-I, and 1-2 istricts, and for buildings used for
commercial etail activities located within a PZM district
and located n property adjacent to B.2, B-3, B-4, I-I, or 1-
2 districts, t ere shall be two (2) options for permitted
signs, as lis ed below in 2.(b)i. And 2.(b)ii. The property
owner shall elect one option, which shall control sign
developmen on the property.
.
CURRENT
ORDINANCE
1.
.
11.
"
.
Opt" on A. Under Option A, only wall signs shall
be lowed. The maximum number of signs on
any rincipal building shall be six sign boards or
plac rds, no more than four (4) of which may be
pro uct identification signs. Si sma
dis a ed on at least two w B or e
er 0 streets u on whic e property as
eg rontage, w lC ever is greater. Each wall
sh I contain no more than two product
ide tification signs and two business
ide tification signs. The total maximum area of
wa signs shall be determined by taking twenty
per ent (20%) of the gross silhouette area of the
fro t of the building up to three hundred (300)
-squ e' feet, whichever is less. If a principal
bui ding is on a comer lot, the largest side of the
bui ding may be useJ to deteriiiine the gross
sil ouette area.
purposes of determining the gross area of the
ouette of the principal building, the silhouette
sh I be defined as that area within an outline
dr wing of the principal building as viewed from
th front lot line or from the related public
str et(s).
o tion B. Under Option B, a combination of wall
si s and a maximum of one (1) pylon sign may
be utilized. The e
id ntification signs allowed (whether wall or
p on s a e a eas wo (2), or e ual to the
b ree s u on which the r
e fronta e w . c ever IS greater. Only two
p 0 uct 1 entlfication signs shall be allowed, and
t ese wall signs may be only on one wall. The
to al maximum allowable sign area for any wall
s all be determined by taking ten percent (10%)
o the gross silhouette area of the front of the
b 'lding up to one huncred (100) square feet, J I,
EXHIBIT A St>..,.
.
.
.
whic ever is less. The method for determining
the oss silhouette area shall be as indicated in
Subd. 2.(b)i. Above. Pylon signs shall be
regul ted as in Subd. 4 below. For single or
do ubI occupancy business structures, the total
maxi um allowable signage on the property shall
be th ee hundred (300) square feet. For multiple
occup ncy structures, the total maximum
allow ble signage on the property shall be as
deter ' ned under Subd. 3 below.
(#272,06/26/95)
(#230,06/22/92)
(#247,03/14/94)
(#265, 12/12/94)
3. Conditional Uses i Commercial and Industrial Districts: The
purpose of this sect" on is to provide aesthetic control to signage
and to prevent a p oliferation of individual signs on buildings
with three (3) or m re business uses. The City shall encourage
the use of single si boards, placards, or building directory
SIgnS.
(a) In the case 0 a building where there are three (3) or more
business us s, but which, by generally understood and
accepted de nitions, is not considered a shopping center
or shopping all, a conditional use shall be granted to the
entire build'ng in accordance with an overall site plan
under the p ovisions of Option A or Option B (described
in 2 (b) i an ii above) provided that:
i. The owner of the building files with the Zoning
A ' nistrator a detailed plan for signing
illu trating location, size in square feet, size in
per ent of gross silhouette area, and to which
bus ness said sign is dedicated.
..
11.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE
No enant shall be allowed more than one sign,
exc pt that in the case of a building that is
sit ated in the interior of a block and having
ano her building on each side of it, one sign shall
be llowed on the front and one sign shall be
allowed on the rear provided that the total square
foo age of the two signs does not exceed the
ma imum allowable square footage under Option
A 0 Option B described in 2 (b) i and ii above.
-- .......
-s-'
3/49
.
.
.
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE
Hi.
No i dividual business sign board/placard shall
exce d twenty-five percent (25%) of the total
a110 able sign area.
IV. An wner of the building desiring any alteration
of si s, sign location, sign size, or number of
sign shall first submit an application to the
Zo 'ng Administrator for an amended sign plan,
said application to be reviewed and acted upon by
the oning Administrator within ten (10) days of
app ication. If the application is denied by the
Zo 'ng Administrator, the applicant may go
befo e the Planning Commission at their next
re arly scheduled meeting.
v. e event that one tenant of the building does
not tilize the full allotment of allowable area, the
exc ss may not be granted, traded, sold, or in any
oth r way transferred to another tenant for the
pur ose of allowing a sign larger than twenty-five
per ent (25%) of the total allowable area for signs.
vi.
Any building identification sign or building
dire tory sign shall be included in the total
allo able area for signs.
Vll. An sign that is shared by or is a combination of
two or more tenants shall be considered as
sep rate signs for square footage allowance and
sh 1 meet the requirements thereof.
Vlll. All igns shall be consistent in design, material,
sha e, and method of illumination.
In the case f a building where there are two (2) or more
uses and w . ch, by generally understood and accepted
definitions, is considered to be a shopping center or
shopping m 1, a conditional use permit shall be granted
to the entir building in accordance to an overall site plan
indicating eir size, location, and height of all signs
presented the Planning Commission.
(b)
of five percent (5%) of the gross area of the
ette shall apply to the principal building
where the ggregate allowable sign area is equitably
distributed among the several businesses. In the case of
applying t 's conditional use permit to a building, the
building m y have one (1) pylon or freestanding sign
identifying the building which is in conformance with this
.JIIIIP ~> 1
-'
3/50
LOCATION
.
-':':'::.~--,.~ ......
Use Permit
d'tional
t to a Con I or more
endmen llow three
est or an am. District to a .
A ..qu PZM Zoumg ,'al buddmg, " 1 Plat.
Within the a commerCI k 52 Oflgma
ns on 2 Bloc ,
business s g 11 and 1 ,
et Lots
103 Pine Stre ,
.,~.
, \~
\~\
, .
EXHIBIT
B
,/'/ -~
I ! ..... . i
· ,/,'pEffi~ .~ /":
. '-f/ "/1 ~Cn~,^ _
,..~--,
~........-----
f'"""\
....""
C:)
I
LAND SURV Y I
___________--1
RI ER STREET
NO ~NICINIiI ......
NO ~.....o .....
4','
5 89"12'48" W
132.62
66.31
----1---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
- _1- _ __
-- ('
...J
DO "'"
7
. -
,"r
\
\..'
,"').
\..J
1-
...
,,~
~(()
9(0
'" .
PU12.7J
0(0
0.....
z
" ;
..... ....
- ~ ;'""
"
'"
c
~
;>
..,
"
a
~
o
,.
g
:;;
('
.J
0
--
.' "
"
".
.:s 1 f"\
. II..,)
1 8.M r ..
~. 0'"
".
iro , E~\ I"'t!; lot tQ
I
"
~ '..~
(f:...':;i~~c:tJrt)
\ rOlf' ~h::I. ."try
\
. .
-"'15"~ ......SL/
66.31
.'
rock ~ "'rub_
,..~.......
roek .Ii: ....rub.~
..........,.s Mj.t. S',,,""
2.89
44.05
'. .
.'" <;oner.t. .:fI";~k ..
~ ~I
! I.
~ :. '"
L :,!"
\' '.
PP'lI'
.~'
....:
~r:;J
'"
., ,:,-, RI
70.30
I
ER5TREET 5T A TIQN r:;J
103 Pin. St. ,;
Monticello, MH 55362 , '
b1od< oil b<ick OO<1atNcllon -I: ,jY
M65 oq. ft.1 r\l
",... 114 5
8
<j
..""a
, .
,
,~; :s:
" .
to '"
(() "a
. ..... ..r
2 :0'> a
-Ii --: 0
" Z
~ "
t . ,
r:;J ",
1. ",'
" #'~ ~'
'.
tf;" ",
S
S' '
oxk oil ",,,,b.
3.90
I
\t,
'" \
PP
2.20
o
--
--
~~~(f)
I gf\.)
';0>
I ~O
~O
\ r-f
ll"1, ^
.'., .'" ...,......'.
.' ;.... " ~ "'j'" .' " '''..... '33 46 '
.;.,.......' concrete olleywoy . A'" ,.'....'; :.~ ,,. N 89"17'33" E
.. l . ~-_ a '.' if, t. .. .. ,:.." _. '. ~.'" '"
Un_ ~alll!f wi~h and
I 10 foe!. _th of ll"1.
1"1.,._1"",'" .......~t . '".
,:.4'
'"
\
I
\
\
-,
I
s
9
.n
III
I
5'b-8'
EXHIBIT C
'-
~
~ ,--..
~ l{)
~ N
~ >-=
r.n 3:
I
w
~ I-
Z <(
f--
....-4 U1
P-.t '-"
HorttIOCiId com.. ~t 10
DEVELOPMENT SERVI ES - BUilDING INSPECTIONS
250 EAST BROAD AV, PO BOX 1147
SIGN (51)
Permit Application
.-"..
MONTICEllO, M~~362
City Hall (612)295-:'.'11
Fax (612) 29!5-4404
<%m:i:::it~8(t1f!i;:Ht~fBB!~il:;ir;!~:m::::,
~';:R_I~::NI!~:~!~t~~\iti~~i::ijjj;i:,'j:jj.:,.::.:.:iL
, Building Inspection (612) 295-3060
tl~1klm~m~m~\~ml@~~~?:{:~~~:t:~:: ':::~::*::~:::::::::,,:, ',;.:::: ".
,.~,:.:.:-:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::.::::::::~:~::?;:=:=:=?::-: ..... -. .. -. .
Date:
) I - 8 - '1'7
o~ \> \~'t.
~+,
SS3foL
Site Location:
NUMBER
Tenant/Building Name:
LOT BLOCK
llot I?.
STREET
SUITE/UNIT NO.
lIP CODE
\ 0't e.S~ <tr-,
ADDITION OR SUB.DIVISION
p..} 1\.1.. P 1l}1- A o~-\)' ~
PROPERTY 10 NUMBER
155- o}o- O:S~ /1U
The Applicant is: - D Contractor
Property Name: J RO :::' L'
O LAST
wner Address:
NUMBER
~olV-hce \k,
Contractor
City:
Company:
. Name:
LAST
Address:
.
City:
~lpliOn 01 \'Iork:
Width 11
X Height
Location of Property:
(Site Plan May Be Required)
Phone: c-J9 S - /77 fc
UNIT
Zip Code: 5 $ 30.2--
STREE
State:
(Y);N 10
License No:
Phone:
FIRST
MI
NUMBER
STREE
UNIT
Zip Code:
State:
Sign Mes~:;age:
Zoning District:
e..
5
~\\
\.SJ ANf.'~u~.s
85
4x~
3d.
List All Existing Signs on Premises:
(Add Additional Pages if Necessary)
~O'toll s~e 5
x a
x~-
Sq. Feet
o
sa
3d...
Location/Message
17
I
J..eels TA-\ (ro}.) bo
R I'Jf,e.s-HfeJ a~~
C
<J
x
x
x
\
\ Please Complete Other Side
\
#0 -- ,
EXHIBIT D
.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF SIGNS AT 103 PINE STREET
KATHY FROSLIE CONDITI NAL USE REQUEST
.
.
EXHIBIT E
,10
.
PHOTOGRAPHS OF SIGNS AT 103 PINE STREET
KATHY FROSLIE CONDIT ONAL USE REQUEST
~.~
.. - -. -~' .............------------
.
.
EXHIBIT E
.
.
.
3.
Special PI nning Commission Minutes - o~ .'
. . . . '-'Jib
" under a ~
O'Neill explained that Riverstreet St tion is seeking a conditional use permit
which would allow establishment of sign system tor a building that
contains three or more business uses. Presently, Riverstreet Station
contains eight business uses, which i eludes an antique mall and seven office
uses. There were a number of varian es that were requested associated with
the original sign plan proposed by Ri erstreet Station. After further review
of the sign ordinance and site conditi ns, the applicant has decided to modify
the original application by utilizing p 'marily a pylon sign versus wall signs
as originally contemplated. This decision has a positive effect of allowing the
development of the sign system that eeds no variances. Under the original
proposal, at least two variances were needed in order for the conditional use
pennit to be approved.
Riverstreet has 191 lineal feet of fron age, which per city code, will allow 58
square feet of signage on a two-sided ylon sign. In addition there will be a
wall sign on the south side of the str cture.
Chairman Frie opened the public hea 'ng.
Tom Brion, owner Riverstreet Statio ,wanted to elarify that the CUP would
allow three or more signs on one property.
O'N eill stated that three or more signs would be correct. It is time that the
Commission looked at the entire sign ordinance to make sure it is up to date.
There have been many changes in th last 15 years, especially in the
downtown area, and time should be ken to review our sign ordinance
during the comprehensive planning p ocedure.
There was an agreement among the c mmissioners to study the sign
ordinance at the next comprehensive Ian meeting in July.
Chairman Frie closed the public hea
JON BOGART MADE A MOTION T APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT ALLOWING A SIGN SYST M WITH THREE OR MORE
BUSINESS USES BASED ON THE INDING THAT THE SIGN SYSTEM
PROPOSED IS CONSISTENT WITH CITY CODE IN ALL RESPECTS AND
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CH CTER OF THE BUSINESS IN
WHICH IT IS LOCATED. SECOND D BY DICK MAR'I'fE. Motion passed
nnanimously.
~_I1-
EXHIBIT F
.
.
.
5E.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
Trucking.
The following are excerpts from Panning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
The Planning Commission requested hat items 10 and 11, both referring to
Danner Trucking, be discussed at the same time. Staff report on this item
was presented by Steve Grittman. M . Grittman provided background
information regarding the proposed 0 dinance and described various
requirements contained within the p oposed ordinance that are intended to
mitigate possible undesirable effects n interim use for trucking and trucking
services may have on neighboring us s.
Mr. Grittman made several suggestio s regarding the plan presented in
application for the interim use permi . It appears that required customer
parking spaces and semi-trailer stora e areas are insufficient as presented.
If an interim use permit were all owe , it was recommended that the interim
use permit be issued for a fixed term uch as not exceed 5 years in duration.
Chairman Frie opened the public hea 'ng and recognized Jim Fleming,
attorney representing Mr. Danner. r. Fleming reiterated several points
previously made to the Planning Co mission.
Hearing no other comments, Chairm n Frie closed the public hearing.
MOTION BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO REC MMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
THE ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED AME DING THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW
TRUCK REPAIR BY INTERIM USE PE IT AS PROPOSED IN THE ORDINANCE
INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT "A", BASED U ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE
AMENDMENT WOULD BE CONSISTE T WITH THE CITY'S GOALS IN THE T.H.
25 CORRIDOR AND WOULD BE CONSI TENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE B-3
ZONING DISTRICT.
Motion seconded by Dick Martie.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Motion to approve the findings and actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above
2. Motion to approve [some othe action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
8
.
Staff recommends alternative #1 abo e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
See Planning Commission staff repor with item 5F.
.
.
9
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
.
.
5F.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
(F.P.)
The following are excerpts from Panning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
MMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
D FOR DANNER TRUCKING SUBJECT
SO LISTED AS EXHIBIT "C" OF THE
MOTION BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO REC
AN INTERIM USE PERMIT BE APPRO
TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS [
STAFF REPORT]:
1. COMPLIANCE WITH THE TER S OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
ALLOWING TRUCKING SERVIC AS AN INTERIM USE IN THE B-3
DISTRICT.
2. REVISION OF THE SITE PLAN 0 SHOW ADEQUATE PARKING (OR
PARKING AREA) WITH APPRO lATE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING
PAVING AND CURBING.
REVISION OF THE SITE PLAN 0 SHOW MORE THAN 6,000 SQ FT OF
TRAILER PARKING AREA, WIT A GRAVEL SURFACE AND A METHOD
OF GRAVEL CONTAINMENT.
3.
4. SUBMISSION OF A LAND SUR Y AND SITE PLAN DRAWN TO SCALE
DOCUMENTING ADEQUATE D ENSIONS OF THE SITE TO
ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOS D LAYOUT.
5. SUBMISSION OF FINANCIAL G ARANTEES TO ENSURE
INSTALLATION OF ALL IMPRO MENTS AS SHOWN ON THE FINAL
SITE PLAN.
6. EXECUTION OF A DEVELOPM NT CONTRACT FOR THE INTERIM USE
PERMIT INDICATING A SPECI IC TERMINATION DATE FOR THE
PERMIT, SIGNED BY THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT.
7. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL BUlL ING CODE REQUIREMENTS.
8. THE APPLICANT MUST HAVE ONTROL OF THE LAND AREA
CONSIDERED FOR THE INTER M USE AND AS DEPICTED BY THE
PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
This motion is based on a finding tha the interim use permit allows the City
to manage the current and future la d use of the area, and the conditions
attached to the permit would mitigat the potential negative impacts of an
industrial use in the commercial dist . ct.
Motion seconded by Richard Carlson. Motion passed unanimously.
10
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
MOTION TO AMEND THE PREVIOUS OTION BY DRAGSTEN TO ADD A
FURTHER CONDITION THAT THE IN RIM USE PERMIT HAVE A DURATION
OF FIVE (5) YEARS FROM THE DATE 0 ISSUANCE BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
Motion seconded by Carlson. Motion as sed unanimously.
1. Motion to approve the findings nd actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
2. Motion to approve [some other action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
Staff recommends alternative #1 abo e.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Planning Commission staff report.
.
.
11
.
10.
11.
.
.
C. ',0:' ...!Of"
.,Ii ~)' iii ill
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
Truckinir. (NAC)
This report is intended to follow up 0 the City Council's decision not to
approve the amendment to allow truc 'ng uses in the B-3 district by
conditional use permit, The City Cou cil referred the issue back to the
Planning Commission to consider an 'nterim use permit approach in an effort
to avoid a permanent industrial use i the highway commercial district.
Under the language in the attached z ning amendment, this use would be
allowed by interim use permit subject to a series of specific conditions as
suggested by staff in its discussion of he agenda item,
The proposed zoning ordinance amen ment attached to this report includes a
limiting factor by restricting the amo t of area and location on a site which
can be devoted to the keeping or stor ge of commercial trucks. The Building
Official has suggested that a specific umber of such trucks would be too
difficult to enforce. The method prop sed in the attached ordinance would
establish the appropriate size and loc tion at the time of interim use permit
approval. While this method is not f1 olproof, it would relate the use of the
site to an approved plan.
Since Danner has suggested that the would be developing the site to permit
future conversion to another B-3 use, an interim use permit process could
solve Danner's redevelopment proble with less possibility of other B-3 areas
being put to heavy truck repair uses. Staff continues to have concern over
the effect of adopting an amendment 0 the B-3 district (the City's most
visible commercial zone) which woul allow a use which is industrial in
nature, particularly with the aspect f outdoor semi-trailer storage.
With regard to the issuance of an int rim use permit to Danner for this site,
the following requirements would be ecessary to accommodate the request:
A.
Vacation of the Marvin Road ght-of-way which extends through a
portion of the proposed Danne site, Marvin Road is not programmed
to be constructed in this area; owever, a relocation of Cedar Street to
serve a '1Jackage" road system for TH 25 is probable.
11
~F --I
.
.
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
Compliance of the Danner site Ian with the criteria listed in the
ordinance amendment as adopt d. Those criteria are summarized
below:
B.
1. Architectural Appear nce. The building is proposed to be a
metal building according to previous discussions with the
applicant's representativ . This material is not prohibited in
the B-3 district and woul appear to be similar to a number of
neighboring buildings.
2. Screened Parking Are s. There are no adjacent residential
districts.
Parking, Driveway, d Storage Area Surfacing. The
zoning ordinance requir s that a surface material for storage
areas is used which avoi s dust and drainage problems. This is
typically considered to b gravel. Staff would recommend that
some containment of the gravel storage area be provided such as
concrete parking barrier . With regard to the parking lot, this
area must be paved wit bituminous or concrete surfacing and
surrounded by a perime er curb. The only way of avoiding this
requirement is through conditional use permit in the I-lor 1-2
industrial districts.
3.
4. B.3 Minimum Lot Di ensions. There is currently no
minimum lot area for th district. Minimum lot width is 100 ft.
For the site in question, Cedar Street would be the front lot line
as the narrowest confo 'ng legal frontage. The site plan shows
a frontage well in exces of 100 ft.
5. Outside Storage. No torage (other than semi-trailers
discussed under point 7 is proposed.
Parking Area Accessi ility and Paving. No surfacing detail
has been proposed. The parking areas must be paved as noted
above and surrounded y a continuous perimeter curb. One
significant problem wit the proposed site plan is accessibility of
the parking area. Alth ugh the dimensions of the site plan are
not exact, it would appe r that there is just 35-40 ft between the
southeast corner of the uilding and the lot line. A minimum
parking area depth wo ld include a 5-ft separation from the
building, a 20-ft deep p king stall, a 24-ft wide drive aisle, and
a minimum 5-ft setbac from Cedar Street. This would require
at least 54 ft to acco odate a parking area in the proposed
location.
6.
12
5F-2-
.
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
A commercial building 0 the size proposed would require
approximately 26 parkin spaces. Therefore, the site appears to
have inadequate room to supply the required off-street parking
as designed. The applic nt has shown 13 spaces, although these
are inaccessible as noted above. It would be necessary to
relocate the parking are to the proposed circulation space to
the south of the building Twenty-six (26) spaces would
consume much of the tr 'ler parking area shown on the plan.
Trailer Parking Area. The proposed amendment would allow
a maximum of 6,000 sq of area to be devoted to outdoor trailer
parking and circulation. This would typically accommodate four
to five trailers and circ ation space to move them on site. This
6,000 sq ft would be the aximum allowable gravel area. All
other circulation and pa king areas must be paved. The
proposed plan shows a tailer parking and circulation area of
approximately 10,000 s ft south of the proposed building, The
circulation area is proba lyoversized, Moreover, it would be
necessary to relocate th parking area to a portion of this space.
Finally, the site plan de ails a lot width in this area ofless than
50 ft, although it meas es more. If the detail is correct, it
would be insufficient to t semi-trailers on the property in the
proposed location.
7.
.
8. Service in the Buildi g. The applicant has indicated that all
service will be conducte inside of the new building.
9, Chapter 22 Procedur I Provisions. This section requires
consistency with existin land uses and the comprehensive plan.
The City would have to ake a finding that the proposed use is
consistent with the pIa , which generally calls for commercial
uses in the area.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
DECISION 1: INTERIM USE ORDINAN E AMENDMENT
Motion to approve the ordina ce amendment to allow truck repair by
interim use permit as propose in the ordinance included as Exhibit A,
based upon the findings that t e amendment would be consistent with
the City's goals in the TH 25 c rridor and would be consistent with the
intent of the B-3 district.
1.
.
13
SF". 3
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
2.
Motion to deny the ordinance endment based upon the findings that
the proposed use does not consi t of retail/commercial uses as intended
in the B-3 district.
3. Motion to table action on the 0 dinance amendment pending further
consideration by the City and t e applicant.
DECISION 2: INTERIM USE PERMIT F R DANNER TRUCKING
1. Motion to approve the interim se permit for Danner Trucking subject
to the conditions listed in Exhi it C, based upon a finding that the
interim use permit allows the ity to manage the current and future
land use of the area, and the c nditions attached to the permit would
mitigate the potential negative impacts of an industrial use in the
commercial district.
2. Motion to deny the interim use permit for Danner Trucking, based
upon a finding that the propos d use cannot be made to be consistent
with the comprehensive plan.
.
3.
Motion to table action on the i terim use permit pending additional
information.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
As with the original request, staffis oncemed that the use has more in
common with industrial uses than wi h retail/commercial uses commonly
found in the B-3 district. While som of the specific activities are similar to
those of other B-3 uses, the commerc'al interchange would not occur with this
use. The interim use permit process ould allow the City to permit Danner
to remain on the site with specific im rovements; however, the site plan
proposed by the applicant would nee redesign to accommodate the proposed
use, as well as a future conversion to a more mainstream B-3 land use. We
would recommend that if the interim use permit is granted, it is accompanied
by a security to ensure the installati n of all required site improvements and
is issued for a term of five or fewer y ars. The City anticipates an active
commercial development market in t is area during the five-year time frame.
The City could consider re-issuing the permit if conditions are significantly
different than anticipated.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Exhibit A - Proposed ordinance ame dment
Exhibit B - Danner site plan
Exhibit C - Proposed conditions of a proval
14
~r-"
.
.
.
City of Mo tlcello
Wright County, Minnesota
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10, CHA TER 13, OF THE MONl1CELlO ZONING
-ORDINANCE RELAllNG TO THE ESTABLlS MENT OF TRUCKING SERVICE AS AN
INTERIM USE IN THE B.3, HIGHWAY BUSI ESS DISTRICT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTI ELLO, MINNESOTA HEREBY ORDAINS
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 13 is amended to add the following:
1.
13-5: INTERIM USES: The fOllowing a e interim uses in a "8.3" District (requires
in interim use permit based upon oprocedures set forth in and regulated by
Chapter 22 of this ordinance).
[A] Trucking and Trucking S rvice provided that:
1. The architectural ppearance and functional plan of the
building and site hall not be so dissimilar to the existing.
conforming buildi gs or areas as to cause impairment in
property values or constitute a blighting influence within the
district in which th proposed use is located.
2. Parking areas sh II be screened from view of abutting
residential districts i compliance with Chapter 3, Section 2 of
this ordinance.
3. The entire site, 0 her than that taken up by a building,
structure, or planti g5 shall be surfaced with a material to
control dust and d inage, which is subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
4. The site shall meet inimum lot dimension requirements of the
District.
5.
No outside 5torag except as allowed in compliance with
Chapter 13, Sectio 4 [E] of this ordinance.
Exh bit A · Ordinance Amendment
::,"'-' .-.-.
.
.
.
6.
Parking areas a ssible to the public. including customers
and employees sh II be paved in compliance with Chapter 3,
Section 5 of this 0 dinance.
7.
No more than six
be devoted to the
tractors and traile
connection with a
sand (6,000). square feet of the site shari
orage, parking, andlor circulation of semi-
, as illustrated on a site plan submitted in
application for a Conditional Use Perm it.
8. All service activiti shall occur within the principal building or
approved accesso buildings
9. The provisions of hapter 22 of this ordinance are considered
and satisfactorily at.
This ordinance shall become effective from a d after its passage and publication.
I/sl/
".," -~~
'"
i i
i i
. ,1 i
~t:. g
~!:'~ .
.~: ~
:.. :l
~. ,
A,
ii
-<'!~ -
~~~! ;
-r". i ,
!
-
I
,~...
f:
~,
ii,
t',
.'':
. ..
I..
~,
.~
t\
~
;t
t
~l
,
t
~1
,',
'"
4
1
j.
~
"
.
-
l.D.
~
N
U"')
f"'")
. .
..
.. .
.
{
.~
.
t
'.
t'"'
I
\
':-
~
~- .,
\
, ~",.
.,
.~'
~
oil
~
fP~
~
..t
~~
.
, .
-. ~.
~~~
.
I
~
~
\~~
G
I
L~ !
I i
(....._---. I 'oL
-- , - 1
.~ I
i-- - I
I
I....
... -
~.-~..a._....
o
. :c::
,- -..
'.0""
l ....J ~
I .... Gt
: ~ ~
; CC 4.r
"" -
, <d>"$" ~
.... ,J..:
-,
<."T =,
cti
,
. tlg,
~
.-
,.
z
... --
:os ,
\ ,..-
. ,
'i" ~,
.j
!
,...-.
I
,
t . ~__,
" .
l (- __..
'e;i
t---
I~
.. ... -.
. I ~ .
. -..-
.~
:1
.:, .
oJ
-1';
J~
... .l:.
3-
~.!
~ ,~
{
~ i .
't ,j ~
~~ t 1
~ ~
:> " '7
,
j
.
.
t'
-y I
. I" r
. l
1 .\,
J' ,
. I..,
....
t ..
1...9
11'0
1L\1
, .
--
...-
.J .-
""1 I ~ .
" ,I ,,,. - -. -
~ l. otlerl'l"~I't"'/-,
" ~:- -, - -
,..-.~~~
_i'" t" ~ 'T"r4.: Jtr
&.~~- - -
, .;1
.' - oJ
I ;
.! "<
.
I <r:
., '" .J
,
- I I 0...
I~ I
I '.' 101
~- 1 , .' ....
... ' J. '. , '1;
I~ 't , ~ ' .. ,
I .. ~
oJ .J :~
u ~".'~1 ,~
I ~ : ;l
'~~ ..' ;.,,)
, :.' ,.1'. ~
V ~
,.'
.,':..1.. ....
ow ."~:'i': .",
'1..
<t-
a
.,
'"
...,
,..-----
~ , ~4r.r\~ .
.. L-~....-.........-. .-..
r'
(/I
"
f-
~"S
_ -.t
.'\J ~
,'?h
~ ~.
.
.
.
CONDITIONS OF INTERIM SE PERMIT APPROVAL
DANNER T VCKING
1.
Compliance with the terms of the or . nance amendment allowing trucking
service as an interim use in the B-3 istrict.
2.
Revision of the site plan to show ade uate parking (or parking area) with
appropriate improvements, includin paving and curbing.
3.
Revision of the site plan to show no ore than 6,000 sq ft of trailer parking
area, with a gravel surface and a me hod of gravel containment.
4.
Submission of a survey and site plan drawn to scale documenting adequate
dimensions of the site to accommoda e the proposed layout.
5.
Submission of financial guarantees t ensure installation of all
improvements as shown on the final ite plan.
6.
Execution of a development contract or the interim use permit indicating a
specific termination date for the per 't, signed by the City and the applicant.
7,
Compliance with all building code re
E ibit C.. Conditions of Approval
~ ':."'11,' .w
.
.
.
5G.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
(F.P.)
The following are excerpts from Panning Commission minutes
(unapproved):
Fred Patch presented the staff report for this item. The effects of the existing
and new ordinance were explained. he commission expressed that this is a
long overdue change and makes sens .
Chairman Frie opened the public hea 'ng. Mr. Robin Peikert of 2880 Red
Oak Circle was recognized. Mr. Peik rt expressed concerns regarding the
elimination of the 2-ft setback requir ment for fences. Patch explained social
consequences, enforcement difficultie , private property rights, and the
possible adverse possession actions t at could come from confusion of
property line locations caused by setb ck fences.
Mr. Glen Posusta, resident of 10383 hler Ave. NE and owner of Amax
Storage, spoke against the new ordin nee in its prohibition of new barbed
wire fences in the city. He stated tha he would see barbed wire around the
top of a fence that may be erected on is business property as good
advertising for security.
Hearing no other comments, Chairm n Frie closed the public hearing.
The Commission discussed the favor ble aspects of the proposed ordinance
regulating fences.
MOTION BY ROBBIE SMITH TO RECO MEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
THE ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPT R 3, SECTION 2[F], OF THE
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE STABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF FENCES BE ADO TED.
Motion seconded by Rod Dragsten. otion unanimously approved.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Motion to approve the findings and actions of the Planning
Commission as recorded above
2.
Motion to approve [some othe action to be determined by City
Council at the meeting].
12
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
Staff recommends alternative #1 abov .
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Planning Commission staff report.
.
.
13
.
.
.
14.
C"C'..~[oy
'I ill
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
The existing fence ordinance is confu ing and has created undesirable land
use conditions. In addition, the curre t fence ordinance does not address
community aesthetic concerns such a barbed wire installations and exposed
structural components.
Specific undesirable effects of the cent ordinance include:
Fences must be setback 2 ft from property lines or a license
agreement must be signed y both property owners and
recorded at the Office of th Wright County Recorder. These
requirements have caused pro lems between neighbors and have
created a condition where usa Ie lot area is unjustifiably reduced.
Where two neighbors each wa t to erect a fence and do not want to
sign a license agreement, a 4- unusable and likely unmentioned area
would be created between the wo fences. If only one property owner
erects a fence on his property etback 2 ft from property lines, it is
likely that confusion and confl cts regarding location of property lines
will eventually occur. This m y result in adverse condemnation
actions between adjoining pro erty owners whereby portions of one
neighbor's land is granted by court to the other neighbor.
Enforcement of this provision as been unnecessarily burdensome on
staff.
.
. The current ordinance appear to prohibit the construction of 6-ft high
fences in the front yard setbac ; however, a 6-ft fence may be erected
at the property line on a side onting on a public street regardless of
the interior lot use. Only fenc s exceeding 6 ft in height may not be
constructed in required setba areas. Unsafe conditions may be
created for traffic approachin or leaving an interior lot. A 6-ft fence
erected on a side yard frontin on a public street and adjoining an
interior lot will obstruct visibi ity.
The current ordinance does n t prohibit undesirable, unsafe, or
blighting fences. The propose amendment will prohibit barbed wire,
razor ribbon, and electric fenc s, and require that the salvage end of
.
20
S-G - J
Planning Commission Agenda - 1/6/98
.
chain link fences must be turn d down. In addition, where fences
have aesthetically objectionabl structural components, the finished or
"good" side must face outward oward neighbors and public right-of-
way.
The proposed amendment to the curr nt ordinance will address each of the
concerns listed above and provide for afer and more aesthetically-pleasing
fence installations.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Move to recommend to the City Council that this ordinance amending
Chapter 3, Section 2, Item [F], f the Monticello Zoning Ordinance
establishing regulations for the installation of fences be approved.
2. Move to recommend to the Cit Council that this ordinance amending
Chapter 3, Section 2, Item [F], fthe Monticello Zoning Ordinance
establishing regulations for the installation of fences be denied.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
.
Staff recommends that the Planning ommission recommend Alternate #1
above.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A - Copy of proposed ordina ce with strike-out and underlining to
show amendments
Exhibit B - Copy of Chapter 3, Sectio 2 [F], of the Monticello Zoning
Ordinance as it will appe r if this ordinance is adopted
Exhibit C - Copy of current ordinanc
Exhibit D - Sketches illustrating the effect of both the current ordinance
and the new ordinance
.
21
oG-2.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
WITH STRIKE-OUT & UNDERLINING
.
ORDINANCE N
CITY OF MON
WRIGHT COUNTY,
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3-2 0 THE MONTICELLO ZONING
ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING FENCING R GULATIONS.
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO DOES ORDAIN:
Title 10, Chapter 3, Section 3-2, Item [F] of he City Code is hereby amended to
read as follows:
1.
me s r fr m h
omin v r e rd. I the case of grade separation
such as the divisi n of properties by a retaining wall, the
height shall be de ermined on the basis of measurement
from the average point between the highest and lowest
grade.
[F] GCNCnAL FENCING,
.
2.
.
EXHIBIT A
.
.
.
[)(C[rTIOt~~.
3.
,~-- _!. J
-..U
.
.
.5....
~
.
.b...
n
".. ~:.Ji< ....
.
1....
a.
.9.,.
1Q..
.
.
d
a 0 rail barbed ends must be I d
.a....
construct d
1.
!L.
iiL.
~
~,. ..
.
.
.
This Ordinance shall become effective imme iately upon its passage and
publication according to law.
day of
ADOPTED by the Monticello City Cou cil this
1997.
CITY F MONTICELLO
By:
Bill Fair, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
AYES:
NAYS:
e;~-"
.
[F]
.
.
ORDINANCE AS WOULD APPEAR
IF ADOP ED
FENCING:
1. A building permit is required for the construction of a fence or wall
that will be more than six (6) fe t in height above grade, or for the
construction of a retaining wall hat is more than four (4) feet in
height from the bottom of the f oting to the top of the wall.
Fence and wall heights are to b measured from the adjoining average
grade. In the case of grade se aration such as the division of
properties by a retaining wall, t e height shall be determined on the
basis of measurement from the average point between the highest
and lowest grade.
2. No fence or wall shall exceed e ght feet six inches (8'-6") in height
except as approved for comme cial and industrial properties, and
tennis courts which may have hain link fences not exceeding ten
(10) feet in height.
3. Fences and walls may be cons ructed anywhere on private property
except as provided below:
a.
Fences and walls excee ing 48 inches in height must be
setback at least 1 5 feet f any property line fronting on a
public street.
b. On corner lots, fences a d walls must not encroach on the 25
foot corner visibility are at a public street intersection. (The
corner visibility area ref rred to above shall be in the form of a
triangle, with two sides formed by the property lines forming
the corner, or straight Ii e extensions of the property lines
forming the corner, and the third side formed by a straight line
connecting the two twenty-five (25) foot points on both sides
of the corner as measur d from the intersection of the property
lines or property line ex ensions forming the corner.)
4. Fences and walls must not be constructed on the public right of way
except for retaining walls as pproved by the City Engineer. Fences
and walls placed upon utility asements are subject to removal if
required for the maintenance r improvement of the utility.
5.
A Certificate of Survey may be required by the Zoning Administrator
to determine the location of f nces and walls on a property-
6.
If the material used in the fence or wall construction is not finished on
S-,
EXHIBIT
~
B
.
both sides, the finished side of he material must be on the outside,
facing the public street, or the butting or adjoining properties. All
posts or structures supporting he fence or wall must be on the inside
of the fence or wall. All fence and walls must be constructed of
durable, weather resistant mat rials and properly anchored. Every
fence or wall must be maintain d in a condition of reasonable repair
and shall not be allowed to be orne and remain in a condition of
disrepair or danger or constitu e a nuisance. Fences or walls in a
state of disrepair may be remo ed by the City as provided by
Minnesota Statutes. The cost f removing fences may be levied
against the property as a speci I assessment.
7.
Electrified wires, barber wire, razor ribbon and the like are prohibited
on fences.
8.
All chain link fences must hav a top rail, barbed ends must be placed
at the bottom of the fence.
9.
Where any fence or wall conn cts to a building used as a dwelling, at
least one gate not less than 2 eet 6 inches in width shall be required
to allow access around the bu Iding.
.
10. All swimming pools, hot tubs, spas and other water tanks exceeding
24 inches in depth must be c mpletely fenced in.
a. Residential Swimming P 01 Fences shall be constructed as
follows:
I. Residential swim ing pool fences must be at least 48
inches in height. The fence must not permit the passage
of a 4 inch spher through openings in the fence.
Fences must be onstructed of durable, corrosion and
decay resistive aterials. Openings below the fence to
grade must not xceed 4 inches.
II. Where an above ground pool structure has walls that are
at least 4 feet in height, the pool wall may serve to meet
the fencing requ'rements; however, the access to the
pool must provide equivalent protection to prevent
unauthorized en ry.
iii.
Fences for swim ing pools must include a self-closing,
self-latching dev ce on all gates. Latches must be
installed at least 3 feet 6 inches above grade. Gates
.
~'-
......,.,.
.
.
.
must not exceed feet in width and must meet the same
construction requi ements as fences. If the pool area is
not otherwise fen ed in accordance with this ordinance,
temporary fencing must be provided during installation of
a swimming pool.
b.
Commercial Swimming P 01 Fences shall be not less than 5 feet
in height and constructe as required by the Minnesota
Department of Health.
~ (; ~.l'''
.
[F]
.
.
GENERAL FENCING, SCREENING, AND LANDSCAPING:
1. No fence shall exce d six (6) feet in height within a required
yard; and in the ca e of grade separation such as the division of
properties by a ret . ning wall, the height shall be determined on
the basis of measur ment from the average point between the
highest and lowest ade,
2. No fence, structure planting, trees, or shrubs shall be permitted
within the visibilit area of any corner formed by property lines
intersecting with a ailway right-of-way. (The visibility area
referred to above s all be in the form of a triangle with two
sides formed by the property lines mentioned and the third side
formed by a straig t line connecting the two (2) twenty-five (25)
foot points on both ides of the corner.)
EXCEPTIONS:
(a) Chain link fi nces with openings of one and five-eights (1-
5/8) inches t two (2) inches and not exceeding a
maximmn of forty-eight (48) inches in height may be
allowed an here within the visibility area.
(b) Except as p ovided in Chapter 3, Section 2, [F] 2, fences,
plantings, tees, or shrubs not over three feet in height
may be pe 'tted if not prohibited by other areas of the
ordinances.
(c) Except as p ovided in Chapter 3, Section 2, [F] 2, fences
may be erec ed on any part of a lot when they are to be
located be . d the front line of the principal building on
that lot.
(d) Fences over 6 feet in height shall be treated as structures
and will req 're appropriate permits as required,
(e)
Except as p ovided in Chapter 3, Section 2 [F] 2, fences
may be erec ed on the side of rear lot lines of a property
subject to a ecordable agreement between adjacent
property 0 ers. Said agreement shall assign
maintenanc and cost responsibilities between the
adjoining pr perties, shall become null and void upon
removal of t e fence, and shall be recorded against the
titles of eac property. Where no agreement is reached,
fences shall e set back a minimum of two (2) feet from
any lot line.
:~"'"
EXHIBIT .C
.
.
'.' ,.
.
.,
At the discr tion of the Building Official, a boundary
survey may be required to ascertain the exact location of
the bound line.
(#248, 3/14/94)
3. In all zoning dist . cts, the lot area remaining after providing for
off-street parking, off-street loading, sidewalks, driveways,
building site, and! r other requirements shall be planted and
maintained in gra s sodding, shrubs, or other acceptable
vegetation or trea ment generally used in landscaping. Fences
or trees placed up n utility easements are subject to removal if
required for the m intenance or improvement of the utility.
Trees on utility ea ements containing overhead wires shall not
exceed ten (10) fe t in height.
.'. . .'.-." -".
....
.' -~',.'. ,-
. .. ,., ...
.".W__. ......_ ..... .._ ._
, G ...1'2-
.
.
~
~
z
~
>
-<
~
~
z
.
~33(l~S
no.!
8t10J
(.. ...... ,J-.P""'--""~"--
,-::-9-: - -
1
i
oj
.~
j
,)
..~ ,<-'....~~, ""i~::~~><.:..:.:..::..::.:..;::;;:.;.;~..::..1.~..;::;' ,..;;.",~.,~..
~-"'..:;r.-:.-~~:>",lli:6.~~
PnA~lno8
/:::;::....-
~ ~ .~ .~ .-0
- .. : : : : : : : 1
.. .. . : : : : : 1
-- . . . : 1
. .: ..: ~ ::
'>" :1
, < :1
.:', :"
,', :'
,'< :'
.....: '
,
-: .;, .: .: ,~ .
.~ ~ ..: .;
.: .: ~ .: .:
.: ~ .;, .~ ,",
.;; ..: .,; .;: .;
,~ -: ~ ,; ..;
.; ~ .:; .:
: .~ '. '~
-:: .; ...; ...:
-. '. :'
-: .;: ~ - I
:"
, '1
, . :1
~ .; ~ --
': :"W
,', :IZ
. . : 1 :J
;' >--
., I-
-' ;.. ;. ;,.--' ;.. ;.: ;.: ;.-:;;>a:
.w
: 1 CL
:'0
'1 a:
; 1 CL
:'
-I
-,
'1
;'
:'
:'
:'
:'
:"
:'
:'
:1
'1
;'
.: ..: .. ... :'
\'~.:<.:-':.:.. :'
.. - .. . . :'
_ .,;,:.,;,:.,;,:..;:..;0
_ . .' . '"v..
.......:r.......~~..~.~.\" ~,~
III _,
a: -,
::d
(.)1
. -: ~ .:: ..: ~ ':
.....;..:...".:..:...:.::';':-':
: ..: .; ,~ .: ,,; .. .;: .; .: .: .: ~
-': ,~ .: -: -':
~r
. -:.r: .~.;
... ..: ..;: .. .. .; ,:
, .c..: -\..:: ~./ -: ': : ~ .:
:!I~l~;~::~:::::~:~ :: :.' , , .; , , , ,
..:.:-:.:.:.:.;.:.;.....:..... . .". T, ~ '~'- _~ ; ..: " -.: .:. -: .: .: "
J~:~::~;::8::I::;t< .
~ ..; ..;
: ,. ( ...:
-------;;---..-....
II)
IN
3NIl All::l3d Ol::ld
Cl
"s::
II).!!,
Cl'~ x
s::E"
.! ~ tu
....... 0
1-....=
~ I/I'ili
aill)!I:
CJ
>~-ca
:u u. >.
.!! 0 'E
(.)zO
II)
.....
1/1
I>>
'';:;
...
Cl~X.
s:: s:: 0
,- I>> ...
.: CJ 0..
0_
i" ~
1>>';:
E'E 0
00.Q
"'CJJ:
-I>>Cl
... .-
II)
s::
-
~ co
-
.... s:: s::
,.. I>> I>>
..:.::J:I>>
CJ3:~
~-Q)
i i..a
1/1 CJ 1/1
Q)~1i)
.Q I/I'X
- Q) Q)
III s::
;::,.- -
E - s::
>.Q)
1/1 1:: E
II) II) Q)
CJ 0.. Q)
s:: 0 ...
II)...Cl
U. 0.. tu
ill
~ 1 i
"
Q)
...
'5
0"
(lJ
...
-
Q)
Q)
-~E
LO Q)
..... >0 c..
S (Q
E >.
0.. .0
;::'''
J:"
1/1 .~ I>>
Q)Q)-
g J: g
Q) s:: ...
-.- Q)
.~
III
tu
I>>
...
_ ;::, tu
_1>>0"..:.::
1/1 (lJ (lJ CJ
;::, - ... (Q
Ecos::.Q
.- -
I/I,,-~
Q)II)J:
CJ Q) Cl'1:l
s:: c.J._ ...
Q) )( I>> co
U. Q) J: >.
"
0.: ~
s::
s::
-
o
s::
s::
Q)
J:
~
~i.--
~~.
Cl)
CJ
c:
('Q
c:
.-
"C
1-
o
Cl)
(.)
C
(1)
LL
en
c
.-
...
UJ
.-
><
W
t+-
o
en
...
(.)
(1)
t+-
t+-
W
EXHIBIT D
.
~
~
z
~
~
.;
~
z
+
o
'<t
"t:J
Q,)
Q,)=
cq~
l: ..
.! Q,)
.=a.
3: U)
Q,) ~
> 5i
..u..
CO ,..'/.io*!;'\L~.i~.Jt"~~..~."-,,,~.-'\!l.'-:Fl!".'~
Q,),,-o
(0 Z ll)
! ~~---4-....
I"..:'.,.":"".'. ~ J2i!~.::::,:~1::~:' ~ ;"~6~~~ :~Uat-;~ ;O-O~- - - -
"II ... Q . ~ ..: .(, .; -: ..: ~ ": ,~ ...: .; .: ~ ..; .;.,:.-.:
',~ .:,.i.,.....l.;...i..,.i.:.l".: :.,"...... .',.. ...... ' : . i .:,.~.ml~II~II: : j H j : : j j j j j j :W W U j :
"'" ~ ~ ~;;j:~;;:~~~;:j~:< :~;~~~;~~~m O://.:';~.,~~ .;.-:~...:.,.:-:/..-:-:i~~
~ _: ~~.- -: > :,mi!!i.ii!~ !i!lliiliiil! j? H H < H:;: j: i
~~~~~~::~:' w :~~~~~i;~m~.":,~ -: ': -: ~..: ~ ~ ,,;.; .: -: ,". . ~ < -: -: ~ ~ -:..: -:-:
:::.:':~;~~: en ~;~;;~~~~~~~: ~..:.-: ~.:.: -: _:': -: '(.:.' -: .:.-:.. ~.~ -: -: -;.:':
~;;~~~~m, 6 ;;;~~~~~~~j~~ ~::: ~ ~:. '; ~.~ . ~ '. -: ~: ~ ;: ~:;:; ~ ~ ~.
:;~;~~~H-~--..------_.-- ~.:..<.:~-:.:~..:..:~.~~ (-=.:.: < ~
~ .; { " ~ .:
~33(l~S (lOOA.
91::1n:>
p.l8Aotlft a
OJ
a:
=>
u
. . ,. .
, . ... ". ~ , ...
A-
ll)
,,...
c
a:
<(
~
I-
::J
0
UJ
UJ U
z Z
:J UJ
>- U.
f- u..
,UJ 0
,a.. UJ
,0
a: C
'a.. (ij
,
, c
,
, UJ
, J:
, en
, z
, u.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
..: ., .: ~ -~ -; .:
~ .; ~ ~ .:
.; .: '1 .; .; .; { .:: .~ .:: ..
..:. ; .: .. ..;: .: ..: "~ ..l -= ..:
,~.(:.~~.:;..:..;;,~~..:
t < .: _: -; " ~ J;"': ~ ..:. ,:';" '~.: ': ~ ~
.~ .: ,~
.,;.
><
ca
E
- -; -: .; ..: -: -: -; ~ ~
~ -: ..: -: ..: ..: ..: ~ .: ..:
,~ -: .. .; .;: ": " .:;
...: i: " -: -: '" .. ...:
: -: -: -: ..: '" -: ~
.: -t: -t: -: .: .,: .. '"
-: .. ..: .:: -: ..; ..
-: -: ..: ... ~ ..: -;.: -:.:" I.: ..:
. .: -: -: .. .: -: .~ " .; ( .: -: .:: .:
-: .: .: -: -: I.: -: -: .::.::.: -: "
.: ;;: ..: .:: -: ..: -: -:".:..: ~ .:
..: ..:.,: -:",,': .:': .. ~ -: .: .,: ~_.': ...,: -: (. ..': -:....:.. -:-:
~..:<<(~<~"~-:<-:{-:~ ,,(-:<<<~~<-:<
.,: .c -: c .,: .( -: '* .( -: .,: (' .l.:
-: .. -: -: -: ...: -: <: . -: -: -: ..: -:
~ -: -: .: .: .: .: .: -: ..:.~ -: -: -:
..: ..: .( ..: 0: ... -: .. -: -: .( 0( ..: ..: -:
-: .: ~ (. -: ..: .: .: -: . ;: .. .: .,: .:
-: " J; < -: "' .; ~ .: .:: J; ( .: .: .:
~~(~'::';{":":.:":i:';:~~
"::"-;",,":<~<-:-:~~~-J:
..; -: (: -:: .: -: .: -; " .: 0: -: .. -: .(
-: ..: ~ ~ .( " ..: -: -.: .. .. -: .( -; ...:
'/l ,: -: .; .: ..: .: .: -: -:.: -: -: .:
..-; .: '.: 0{ -: .: -: ..;: .: ..: -: ..: -.; .: .:
i: .~ .:: ..: ..: -: ,: ;: -: ..:.. -: .: "
-: i: { " -: ... J; (' -: ..: -: ( -: ... -:
..: -: .( ..: -: .: -: ,: -: -: -: ... .. .: (
..: .(. 'I': .( -: ~ -: ..: .. " .. -: -: -: ..
c .. .( -: " -.: -: 0: -: '.: <: .. ..: i: -:
-: ..: -: -: -: .: -: .: -: .:: ( <: -: .: ..;
... 0( ..: ..:: .:: -: ..; .: .:: : " .j -= " -:
~ -: <: -: <10 -: ... ..: -: ... I, ... -: -: -:
.: ...: ~ .. -: ..: -: i: -: Ii ~ ..: ... ~
c ...: ..: 0( -: ..: ... ..: ..: -.: .. -: -: -: 0: .(
.; ,: -: .. " -: -: -: " -: .. .. -( " ..: -: <
.: .: ..: ..: -: ,,: -: -: -: ... -: " -: -: ... " ..:
: " ( ( .. -= ( ( .( -:.. .. 0: .( -: 0:
: ~ -t ..: ( -: -: .: -: -: ..,: .:: " .. -: -.: -:
.:' o! ~".~'-:' ,~'j<-:.c:-:":"':(~~-:":":":.:...':.:-:..: .,:..:(.....-:{"..,:<,:
,; ~ ~ <: ( .~ -: .: '" ~ ..: <:: .: o' -: " .; ,~.: .0: : -: ~ ( -: .,": ...
-0
...
to
>
(I)
::J
o
CD
:..,. ~:
'.0'
:.::,2::--
,""'l!I'..,
.,o;':/.: .: .0;
-..:. <; { ,: ~ ,~
..: 0; ..: ...
"
: ~ ..: .;
" .;
.; -1
<:
~."
..S l
- -' -' ~- -- ~-.'~'~'~'.'
3NIl All:l3d08d
... ,.... ....
------
!
(1)
o
c:
ca
c:
.-
-c
J...
o
(1)
o
c:
(1)
LL
;:
(1)
z
"I-
o
tn
...
o
(1)
"I-
....
W
.4,.
~
'1
.
.
.
5H.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
(J.O.)
Gerhard Meidt, Director of the Monti ello Community Band, has prepared a
grant application to the Central Mi esota Arts Board. In his grant
application, he has requested $2,000 om the Arts Board for supplies and
materials necessary for the band whi h primarily includes sheet music. In
order to obtain the funds, the grant ust be processed through a fiscal agent.
The Community Band requests that e City of Monticello become the fiscal
agent for the grant request. There is 0 out-of-pocket expense by the City to
be the fiscal agent for this grant appl cation.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve becoming th fiscal agent for the Monticello
Community Band grant applic tion to the Central Minnesota Arts
Board.
2.
Motion to deny sponsoring the rant fund request.
c.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends pproval of becoming the fiscal agent
for this grant application by the Mon icello Community Band. Cooperating
with the Community Band is consiste t with the vision statement recently
adopted by the City Council. Under t e cultural category, it's stated that
"our history and the fine arts, includi g music and dance, must be available,
accessible, and promoted and facilita ed at the heart of our city." This
proposal is consistent with that goal; herefore, the City Administrator
recommends approval.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of grant application.
14
.
CENTRAL MINNESO A ARTS BOARD
PROJECT G NT
DATA COLLECT ON FORM
TO THE APPLICANT: This form is used to gather informa 'on about grant applicants to the Minnesota
Regional Arts Councils (RACs). The data is maintained by e Minnesota State Arts Board in cooperation with
the RACs, and may be distributed to others in accordance wi the Minnesota Data Practices Act. Complete
information is necessary to ensure the reliability of our data.
1. APPLICANT INFORMATION
Legal Name of Organization
Street Address
City, State, Zip
I.
Day phone ~ .. t"!t 1.
Contact Person and
Title
County
.
Fiscal Agent Name
(if applicable)
2. SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS:
Mark the one category best describing the
PREDOMINANT racial/ethnic
characteristic of your organization
(optional).
3. STA TUS: Select the one code which
best describes the applicant's legal status.
02
03
05
06
07
08
09
~Q
4. INSTITUTION: Select the one code
which best describes the applicant:
03 Perfonnin Group
04 Perfonnin Group-CollegelUniv
05 Perfonnin Group-Community
06 Perfonnin Group for Youth
15 Arts Cente
16 Arts Coun iVAgency
17 Arts Servi Org.
19 School Di . ct
20 School-P entffeacher Assn.
21 Sehool.El mentary
47 Cultural S ries Presenter
48 Other (de ribe)
o [I]
.
..J
CMAB STAFF ONLY
MN House
District
US Congress.
District
~ White/not Hispanic (W)
_ Multicultural (more than one
of the categories apply (M or G)
_ Other (describe)
22 School-Middle
23 Sehool.Secondary
24 Sehool-Vocationalffech
25 Sehool-other (inel Comm Ed)
26 CoUegelUniversity
27 Library
28 Historical Society/Commisso
32 Community Service Org.
36 Senior Citizen's Center
MSAB STAFF ONLY
SERIAL #
~H..,J
.
.
.
. .
APPLICANT INFORMATION CONTINUED
Organization Name
5. DISCIPLINE: Select
one code which best
describes the applicant's
primary area of interest in
the arts.
01 Dance
02 Music
03 Opera/Musical Theat r
04 Theater
05 Visual arts: drawing, ainting,
printmaking, scu1ptu
06 Design arts: fashion, graphic
architecture,landsca design
07 Crafts: ceramics, fibe , glass,
metal, plastic, wood, . xed media
08 Photography
09 Media arts: film, video, audio
10 Literature
11 Interdisciplinary (incl.
collaboration/performance art)
12 Folk arts: traditions handed
down in contexts characteristic
of specific ethnic/folk groups
13 Humanities
14 Multi-disciplinary
15 Other
00
PROJECT ACTIVITY INFORMATION
6. II ... Adult Artists Participating (Record the n ber of adult artists expected to be directly involved in
providing art or artistic services for these grant activities)
7. 7. .. Adult Audience Benefaing (Record the nu ber of adult audience members, excluding employees,
paid performers or artists, expected to benefit from these ant activities).
8. -'00 ChildrenIYouth Benefiting (Record the n ber of children and youth under the age of 18 expected
to benefit as participants or audience members from the grant activities excluding employees or paid performers).
lOll ~ \9. Project Discipline (Using the same Dis ipline coding listed above, select one category which best
L:J describes the grant activity).
10. RaciallEthnic Emphasis of Grant Activity (optional): U ing the following defmitions (1) and (2), mark the one category
that best describes the PREDOMINANT raciaVethnic emphasi of the Grant Activity:
(1) The intent is to communicate the culture or tradi 'ons ofa particular racelethnic category.
Example: Perfonnances by an African dan company would be coded as "African American"
(2) The activity is widely understood to be reflective of the culture or traditions of one particular raciaVethnic group.
Example: Kabuki theater is performed by y localities and by many Asian and non-Asian groups. All of
these activities would be coded as "Asi acific Islander" because regardless of who produces the work,
the type of theater itself is widely underst to be an expression of Japanese culture.
African American (B) _ HispanicJLatin Chicano (H) J(. Multicultural - Grant activity
AsianlPacific Islander (A) Native Ameri Alaskan (N) DOES NOT emphasize any
White/not Hispanic (W) _ Other (Describe one of above categories (G)
FISCAL YEAR: 1998
$
$
$
$
S
$
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE CENT.
MINNESOTA ARTS BOARD STAFF ONLY
BUDGET:
Grant Amt R
Expenses
ProjectIncom
Project In-kin
Amt Recomm nded
AmtAward
NOV. 1
REGIONAL ARTS COUNCIL: 7W
MARCH 1
GRANT ROUND:
PROGRAM CODE:
JULY 1
_ Project Grant
APPUCA TION ELIGIBILITY STATUS: _ Eligible
Reason for ineligibility or withdrawn application:
_ Ineligible
FUNDING SOURCE:
State $
Found. S
Other S
APPUCATION #
Withdrawn
ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM HAS B EN REVIEWED AND IS COMPLETED AND CORRECT.
.
CENTRAL MINNES T A ARTS BOARD
PROGRAM INFORMATION AND PPLICA TION INSTRUCTIONS
FY98 ARTS PRO CTS GRANTS
(Revised Aug st 4, 1997)
A Proiect Grant is a funding vehicle for any CMAB approved, art activity sponsored by a tax exempt organization or educational
institution in the four counties of Benton, Sherburne, Steams, or W 'ght. The Minnesota State Legislature and the United Arts Fund
provide funding for these project grants.
PURPOSE OF ARTS PROJECTS GRANTS
. To advance the artistic development of the applicant organi tion, audience, and the artists involved in the project.
. To explore new ways of providing collaborative and partici atory artistic activities.
. To further arts education.
. To enhance the quality oflife for everyone in the CMAB re ion.
. To allow a regional organization to host artists and arts ac ivities not provided by the hosting organization. .
APPL YING FOR A CMAB PROJECT GRANT
Any tax-exempt organization may apply. If an organization not yet achieved its tax-exempt status, it may apply to the
CMAB through a fiscal agent. A fiscal agent is any regional, n-profit, tax-exempt organization or governmental unit that
agrees to serve as a fiduciary for an organization not having fo al non-profit, tax-exempt status. The fiscal agent receives
...an, d dispenses the funds awarded by the CMAB. If a grant is warded to an applicant using a fiscal agent, the fiscal agent
wnust sign the grant award contract. The fiscal agent must h ve a written contract with the organization, specifying the
responsibilities of each.
Applications for FY98 art projects grants, must be h sicall in the CMAB office no later than 4:00 PM on one or all of
the following three grant round dates:
July 1, 1997
November 1, 1997
March 1, 1998
EXAMPLES OF PROJECT GRANTS
. Plays, musical events, dance productions, and visual arts e 'bits.
. Projects that are educational in nature, utilize an artistic discipline, and occur during the school day or outside the
traditional school day.
. Art workshops or presenters involving the participation of professional artists.
RULES
.
1. Organizations whose mission is one of religious sociali tion are only eligible to apply for rounds two and three and
funding will only be offered as long as funds are available from United Arts.
2. Either the majority of the artists or the audience must from the 4 county region that the CMAB serves, i.e., the
project does not necessarily have to take place in the fo r county area. Transportation to the Minneapolis/St. Paul
metro area is permissible.
3. The startin date of the ro' ect must be after the final fun in decision is made b the CMAB for the rant round.
~H-3
.
4. Funds must be used only for the project applied for and a cepted for the project within 45 days. The project must be
completed within the time frame specified by the applicant n their grant application.
5. Project grant money will not cover staff pay for regular ho rs/administrative duties.
6. This grant does not provide for general operating supp rt, endoYmlents, capital expenditures, fund-raising events,
scholarships, or deficiencies in other projects.
7. Individual artists may not apply for this grant.
8. An organization may apply at anyone or all of the grant d adlines as long as the project applied for is not one that has
been denied full funding and partially funded by the C in one of the past project grant rounds for FY98. No
organization will be granted more than $3,000 for any 0 e project or more than $3,000 in anyone grant round. You
may apply for multiple projects at each deadline as long as you don't ask for more than a total of $3,000.
9. Requested funds must be matched equally with funds, or . -kind sources, other than those provided by the CMAB.
10. When added together, funds provided by the Minnesota S te Arts Board and/or by the Central Minnesota Arts Board
cannot exceed 50% of the total project cost.
11. An applicant must not have any outstanding final reports ue from previous CMAB grant rounds.
How:
applications are reviewed by the members of the C . CMAB staff is available during regular office hours to
answer any questions you may have on this grant app ication. Applicants will NOT be contacted regarding errors
or incomplete applications after submission, and prior to, Board review. Applicants are responsible for the quality
and scope of their application and supporting materia s. Please check vour mathematical calculations.
the CMAE reviews the grants for clarification at their first regular meeting after the grant deadline.
Applications are then approved for an appropriate Ie el of funding and then ranked compared to each other.
using a 0 (low) to 5 (high) scale, funding is awarded t applicants with the highest rankings until all funds are
exhausted for that grant round. If funds are refused thin 45 days of receipt of grant notification, they will be
offered to the next applicant in rank order. Returned nds or funds refused after 45 days will be applied to
future grant rounds. An applicant must attain at Ie st a 1.5 average score in order to be funded.
out this
You are encoura
REVIEW PROCESS
Who:
When:
.
THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE USED BY THE C B IN REVIEWING AN APPLICATION
. Artistic quality and merit of the project and/or the artists involved.
-background and experience of the artists involved.
-creativity or uniqueness of the project.
. Ability of the applicant to accomplish the project.
-percent of the total project cost requested from C
-other funding sources listed on the grant application.
. Need or demand for the project by the applicant organiza ion or the group it serves.
-geographic location of the arts activity.
-size of the audience.
-any special need being met by this activity and not et by other community activities.
GRANT APPEALS PROCEDURE
A grant applicant who disputes the decision of the CMAB 0 a grant decision may appeal if it is done within 15 days of the
CMAB's decision on the application. Appeals must be base on alleged procedural error. The Minnesota State Arts Board
rules affirm that there is no right of appeal on decisions .th respect to artistic quality or merit, artistic excellence or
leadership. Appeals on the basis of procedural error may be made to the Central Minnesota Arts Board and are handled by
. the Review Process Committee within 30 days of the app 1. The full Board of the CMAB will review the Committee's
explanation and provide a final decision on the appeal.
2
~ H ''1
.
.
PROJECT GRANT APPLI A TION INSTRUCTIONS
Narrative Section
..
Submit 18 copies ofthe completed application AND the colored RAe data form. You must also submit 18 copies
of any supporting materials. Keep in mind that more is no necessarily better and submit ONLY enough information to
present your project fairly.
Applicant Organization: name, address, and telephone n ber of the organization applying for the grant.
Contact: name and daytime telephone number of person pr paring this grant application and directly responsible for the
administration of the project.
Fiscal Agent (if applicable): name, address, and teleph ne number of fiscal agent. If you have a question about
whether or not you need a fiscal agent, please call the C @ 320/253-9517.
Questions 1-4: describe your project and outline the basi information about your project and your organization. It is
important that you include the proper signatures and an ori inal of the application form for certification of the grant.
Questions 5-7: these questions help the CMAB understan the artistic quality of your project. Describe your project in
detail including organization goals, personnel and artists . volved.
Questions 8 & 9: these questions inform the CMAB about your ability to carry out the project.
Questions 10 & 11: answers to these questions will help nvince the CMAB of the need for your project.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Bud2et Section
Project Expenses
1. Salaries: may include special proiect-soecific duties for staff which are beyond the normal scope of their duties, or
hiring of special help for a production or performance. se minimum wage figures ($5.00) for all but professional
services. This includes volunteer wages.
2. Artist fees: any fees paid to the arts provider such as an . dividual artist or an arts organization. FAIR WAGES FOR
ARTISTS: the Central Minnesota Arts Board believes ists should be paid fair market wages for their work, and
require a minimum hourly rate of$23.00 per hour.
3. Supplies: any materials that are specially purchased and sed for this arts activity only.
4. Travel, Transportation and Sustenance: the CMAB pays .315 cents per mile for travel for out-of-town artists. Meals
and lodging should be itemized if required.
5. Other: other expenses include miscellaneous expenses su h as: equipment rental, telephone costs, printing and publicity
costs, etc. Rental of space owned and occupied by the org . zation cannot be ~cluded.
A. Total Project Expense: must equal the total of 1+2+3+4+
Project Revenue
1. Cash: list sources of cash on hand for this project.
2. Other Grants: list grants, other than the anticipated C grant, that your organization is pursuing for this project.
Identify these grants as "received" or "anticipated".
3. Earned Income: list estimated earned income from tickets, fees, etc.
4. In-Kind Contributions: in-kind contributions are donat materials, labor, or services that can be given a dollar value.
The total for in-kind cannot exceed 50% of the Total Rev nue (B), Le., only 25% of the total project support (D) can be
in-kind.
B. Total Revenue For The Project: must equal 1+2+3+4.
C. Amount Requested From CMAB: cannot be an amount g eater than (B) or $3,000.
en. Total Support For The Project: this is the total revenue n ssary to support the project and it must be equal to total
expense for the project (A).
3
~H'~
CENTRAL MINNESOTA ARTS BOARD
WO Bos: 1442, St. Cloud, MN 56302 320/253-9517
RT PROJECT FY98 GRANT APPLICA nON
(Refer To nstructions Before Filling Out Form. Do Not Hand-Write This Form)
Applicant Organization (Name, Address, Zip Code):
Is This Your First CMAE Grant Request?
Check The Box That Applies:
~es
DNa
Project Director Name:
/>tc ;Jt
Daytime Telephone: ;Z, S ... ,.,..32.
Fiscal Agent, If Applicable (Name, Address, Zip Code):
Fiscal Agent Telephone:
Today's Date:
D... " I" 7
1. Briefly (1 or 2 sentences) describe the artistic activity involved in this project.
2. Project Start Date: -'lpv-. I , t
Project End Date:
Year Organization Originated:
",,,
sing the figures from the Proposed Budget sections (pages 7 & 8) lease furnish the following:
1. Total Project Expense: $
Project In-Kind: $
3. Total Project Revenue: $ 4. To Support for the Project: $
Note: Total Project In-Kind must NOT be more tban 50% of Total Revenue.
3. Applicant organization's total annual budget. Governmental uni and public schools can leave this section blank. Others must
answer:
YEAR PRIOR TO PROJECT
EXPENSES
$
~
~
INCOME
$
4. Certification. We certify that the information in this application is true and correct to the best of our knowledge. At least two of
the sil!I1atures need to be from different oeoole. The si ned ori in I of this form oes to the CMAB- ou kee the co -
Authorizing
Official:
Date
Project
Director:
eiSCal
Agent:
",?
Date
Signature
Title
4
Date
~H"'~
.
Information about ARTISTIC QUALITY and merit:
S. Describe the project you plan to undertake. Name major groups artists, performers, dates, locations and production titles. If this
is an expansion or continuation of an existing program, explain the relationship between this project and the existing program.
What will the funding request provide? se the back of this sheet. ou need more room; NOTE: YOU MUST INDICATE THE
TIME OF DAY EACH PROGRAM Wll..L TAKE PLACE, W T SPECIFIC DA Y(S), AND WHERE IT Wll..L OCCUR.
'"'-c.
S~fs
, Y'f/W. +. i .. ." T".. .11 s
c. ",c. ,.1-s .........; 'j 1k~
7lc. M.,+,~.II. t:........._ : "?
~~: . 1/,.; , . It
It..; ~ .'"
.,.... "'C... ( 7ffti\ Tt4..JJ
'1'\ 1'''' ",..&Ie $ ( fh. .1".:. If. ,
; 'J' )
... lit J
f-''f 4-..& ; ,..1-. &
..T
E' Ie '" .
,. L_Ice ) . :r't.'..,e yf"Y',,"$
Co. V ~n ""'...s V~ P,.. J "''''"''''S.
f your organization:
I4Ic k..v& b..,.. \It....l
*
_~, . c.
+,."",
s ~..T
L; D",-"'~.a
h...t- Me t ~(
.,.
<-6 ft.. "1,., ...
.-....w' ~ "''aI\. L: It ( "
7. List the names of the principal artists and administrative perso el in this project and describe their roles and responsibilities.
Attach resumes for principal artists/administrative personnel.
1\, ,,\~,t ~t-Y""
It -. ..
..
1M" ~.,., n
i"
.
M.... . $
f c. y...,........... c. Co
.,..... ,. y; ... :,-...,1
-f""...
tM . ...ke..J
'ST. tAM tv.
lit.
4-~ 6C<<K
.
-
I r'\4~"'~
S,-,"'''T
~.,.. ~.1
&.u~
.,... 6..,......1 ~"h.... ~r"A' I
.,.. S.~IU lot ~..., ~"
F.e"'JtcI F. ".1
#c i,
"
QAl,I
5..p'" .+ S'e'-b 5 C f'I1i...., e.n.... flit..) ~ H -7
Information to demonstrate ABILITY to carry out the project:
8. Please describe any planned publicity. Include, if applicable, th method and range of advertising distribution:
.
~
rn. M.. -t. ~c..ll.
; +t
p..r+""c....s. .. J
e l.-Jp"Y'" ..,. C""'" _e.Vc..&.o
~ .lte.d...f c..
0....., 1 ye......,
9. What related past arts activities demonstrate your organization's ability to plan and carry out a project?
We.
l.~& fevf-r-..u!
+."
I>> 4:1 CA.Y' ·
Information to demonstrate NEED for the project:
10, How will this activity stimulate the artistic development of yo organization? What artistic needs of your arts community or
the general community will be met? What part of the community '11 be served? How will this activity impact individual artists?
. We, "ee..I to c:lc.... I., ...."" I ,-to 'NNr .
L. c.....' S" o.k.. f s It ... '" c.. j,..c.."" '''PI' .....+r '" c.. J........ ~ J.~t
J,."c. -H..c.. ~~c. .~ ,....+...., ~f.. ..., ..... ... ...~ Co-'C" l.{ &.c.Ic.
11. Please list all grants received from the CMAB or the Minneso State Arts Board within the previous 12-month period:
~.. '" &.
.
6
5#...Y
PROPOSED BUDGET
. PROJECT EXPENSES (Round all figures to the nearest dollar
l. Salaries and Wages
(employees and volWlteers of the applicant):
Title or Type of Employee
---->>;'rt. ..t..
2. Artists Fee, Contracts and Honoraria:
3. Supplies and Materials (expendable items only):
AM':"
4. Travel, Transportation and Subsistence:
.
5. Other (rental of space or equipment, printing):
A. TOTAL PROJECT EXPENSE (1+2+3+4+5):
Amount
J I' "
Total Salaries
$ O_tII.t-e,.J ""
~...,:. ...
Amount
Total Fees
$
Amount
, ,...
Total Supplies
$ 2000
Amount
Total Travel
$
AmOWlt
Total Other
$
$ )c,'C-
(TOTAL PROJECT EXPENSE must be equal to TOTAL SUPP RT FOR PROJECT ON NEXT PAGE)
.
7
~H'1
PROJECT REVENUE (contributions, grants and revenues for t is project only)
. 1 Cash Sources (cash on hand or
. budgeted for this project):
Amount
Total Cash
$ r4
2. Other Grant Sources (do not include this CMAB request and
indicate which are anticipated and which have been received):
Amount
Total Grants
$ IS
3. Earned Income (list sources and if applicable, indicate ticket
price, number of tickets you anticipate selling, fees charged,
price of publications, etc.):
Amount
Total Income
$P
4. In-Kind Contributions (describe and list sources, all in.kind
contributions should be reflected in the total project cost):
.
Amount
Total In-Kind *
$ ,,,,,,-
Total in-kind cannot exceed 50% ofB. Total Revenue
B. TOTAL PROJECT REVENUE (1+2+3+4):
$ J'Sc.-
C. AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM CMAB:
(Cannot Exceed 50% of A. Total Project Expenses or $3,000)
$ 2000-
D. TOTAL SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT (B+C)
(Must Equal Total Project Expense)
$
REVIEW THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO SUBMITTIN YOUR APPLICATION TO CMAB:
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
Application is complete and signed by two officials.
RAC data form (colored sheet) is completed; send 18 copies fthis colored form.
18 copies of the application and supporting materials are inc uded.
Brief, one-page or less resumes of the project director and 0 her key people Involved.
Other material that would help the CMAB in the review pro ess. Please limit supporting material only to what is essential for
the project More is not necessarilv better.
SOl( c) (3) non-profit status letter, regardless of whether you ave sent one in the past. Governmental units and public schools
do not have to submit a S01(c)(3) letter.
Fiscal agent agreement where applicable.
Signed orieinal of this grant You are encouraged to keep a opy for your records.
Your in-kind contributions DO NOT exceed 50% of Project evenue.
YOU HAVE CHECKED YOUR MA THEMA TI L CALCULA nONS!
oN .. 10
.
.
.
51.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
(J.S.)
At a previous meeting, the City Coun I approved Change Order #9 granting
Adolfson & Peterson a 31-day extensi n if they would complete all of the
work in the cWorine and decWorinatio systems by March 1, 1998, the date
on which the City of Monticello must egin to chlorinate and dechlorinate our
wastewater prior to discharge into the Mississippi River (the data at the
previous Council meeting incorrectly tated March 15 rather than March 1).
Adolfson & Peterson did not sign the hange order, indicating they could not
complete the work in those tanks by arch 1, 1998. We, therefore, had to re-
analyze the usage of some of the old t ks at the treatment plant. We came
upon the idea of using one of the final clarifiers for the cWorination system,
as it had the same capacity as the thr e old tanks being proposed for the
chlorination system. Since we had tw final clarifiers, it is possible to use
one of them as a temporary chlorinati n system while the other final clarifier
is being fitted for the permanent cWo 'nation tank.
The main difference between using ou existing cWorine tank in the interim
and using one of the final clarifiers is he discharge rate. The existing
chlorination system can only handle b tween 500 to 800 GPM (gallons per
minute) discharge. A final clarifier ca handle a discharge of around 3,000
GPM in the current form, and probab y close to 5,000 GPM when re-piped;
therefore, this seems a prudent appro ch. The change order here does not,
however, involve any of the costs in t is change, and we are currently
studying those plans. This change or er merely involves the extension of
time and utilizing a temporary cWori e tank with the capacity of about 3,000
GPM so that we may meet our permit requirements come March 1, 1998.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be approve Changer Order #9R and
grant Adolfson & Peterson a 31 day extension for the completion of the
SBR Tanks 3 and 2 by Februa 1, 1998, and completion of a
temporary chlorine system by arch 1, 1998, and completion of the
administration building by Jan ary 20,1998.
2. The second alternative would b not approve Change Order #9R.
'i5
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
c.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the reconunendation of the City A inistrator, Public Works Director,
and HDR that the City Council autho . ze and approve Change Order #9R as
described above. A copy of the change order is enclosed for your review.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Change Order #9R.
.
.
16
IaJ 002
01/09/98 FRI 10:43 FAX ADOLFS N & PETERSON
JRN 09 '98 triJ11Zl3 fOR Hm ENQJNEEfi,'It-13 INC 61 591 5413 TO 962S2333
.
P.0:Y93
~
~
Attacbme tA
Change Orde No. 9R
wastewater Treatmen Plant Expansion
MonticeU MN
1. J)xwnent 00500. Anicltl 3.1 and 3.2, da Del:Cmber 18, 1996 between the Oty of
MonUoello; MN. oWNEk, and Molfson Peterson. CONTRACTOR. is amended
as fD110W~:
A. Article 3.1:
1. The interim c(Jmpletion date for
February 1, 1998.
2-
200 and TK3300 shall be changed to
M&relllf.lW1.
The CQIltractor shlll1 utilize TK6 OQE as the temponuy chlorine contact
tank. This tank will be made anal as a cbloriDe com:act 1:2Dk by
M~cb 1, 1998. The Contractor be responsible for all temporary
process pip.wg aud cblorine pipi into TK6100E. No controls fm:
chlorine system lIIC to be provi
B. Article 3.2:
1. The contract 18D~ shall be ded as follows:
.. Acf;ordingly. instead requiri:ng any such proof, OWNER and
CONTRACI'OR agrcc as liquidated damageS for delay (but
not as II penalty) co crOR shall pay &he OWl\l'ER Five
Hundred Dollm ($500) or caob day that expires after the: time
specifiw in paragraph 3. for the Pebruary 1. 1998
(TK3200J'I1{3300). M hi. 1998 .
) (TK6100E1I'K4300B) and April
I, 1998(TK3100) Suhst tial Completion dat85 until the: Wolk is
mbsmntially complete."
.
2. Ser:tion 01010 - SUIIlJIWY of Work. 1.03 ork. Sequcn~. sball be amended. as
follows:
A. Completion date for TK3200 and T 300 $hall be chqecl to Februaty 1.
1998.
B. Completion of tbe AdminIsuation uilding shan be Januuy :ZO, 1998 for all
:rooms except Rooro 913. Room 91 sball be completed by February 1. 1998.
C. Temporary effluent and cblorlne pi ing into TK.6100B except for conuols on
the chlorine system shall operatio by March 1. 1998.
01109198
.
** lUTFL PFGi.93 >kill
S-I-I
HR
~O~
~
Change Order No. 9R
P.0:Y03
01/09/96 FRI 10:44 FAX ADOLFS N & PETERSON
j~ lif3 "38 1,121;02 FR f-m e61t>EERlt.G I"": G12 591 5413 TO ~~,,:J
.
roject NM\e: waetewater Treatment PlMt !xpanskln
1'Oj*ct Owner: CIty of MonIID8IIo.
DR Pfo)ecl No.: 08124-004-t64-
p~ No.: es.14C
e: 'ln1'll8
or.
Pltriod: 1
It Is agreed 10 modify tha CClnInlat ...
3.1
~
o
Mm
Net Increase (deel'MSe) 01 t"1$ Ohange Orwr
OJJO
o
SUl'nlftl!B'y1 It i. .!If"Md to modify
Contract Priee prior to thia Chat\ge Ol'dtor
11,382,e70.!50
.
Net InefeaM (dec....se) of Itllt Ct.-.ge OW
31
'",erim Co
RtlViHd ConIl\lKll Ptice with all 8pProvad Changa ~
11.382.670.50
Rtvind Cannot lime with all approved Change Otdefll
rim Comp!<<ion Oates(referenoe AbOhrMnt A):
February 1, 1 _, Maroh 1. , W8l1nd April '. 1na
Filial CcmpIeti'on Dara= 00I.\'Jbct" IS, 1998
plillMet '" lIOOOI'danoe with the ......... <<lpulatiOM al'ld
'n.
OI$trlbU\ilJn:
L..JCo
Attnt
or L..-JOffIc.
<<
Appto....:l for Own... by;
LJovmer
~ldd
L-Jothar
I'ORM mo5G204 (v..... lob ~ lIQ)
c.,"M 'lI!'l MDR IOPOIllWr.1IIe-
~
111.50'>>-2
.
o.r-2-
.
.
.
5J.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
Wrillht County. (J.S.)
Each year the City of Monticello ente s an agreement with Wright County for
maintenance activities on certain cou ty state aid highways in the city. On
C.R. 75 from Willow Street, near the 'newood School, to C.R. 39, near
Liberty Bank, on the east end of the c mmunity, the City of Monticello is
responsible for snow and ice removal n this 3.74-mile stretch. On C.R. 39
West (Elm Street and Golf Course Ro d) from West C.R. 75 to the public
works building, we are responsible fo 25% of the snow and ice removal, as
we often plow this stretch before the c unty gets into town. In addition to
snow and ice removal on these county state aid highways, the county
reimburses us for a one-time spring seeping.
The 1997 payment to the City ofMon 'cello based on average 1996 County
costs for the maintenance listed abov is $9,023.54.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
The first alternative is to appro e the maintenance agreement with
Wright County as enclosed for our review.
2. The second alternative would b not to approve the 1998 agreement
with Wright County.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City dministrator, Public Works Director,
and Street Superintendent that the C ty Council approve the 1998
maintenance agreement with Wright ounty as outlined in alternative #1.
Staff believes that this results in a be ter level of service to our residents.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the 1998 maintenance agree ent.
17
7856
Wright County Public Works Building
1901 Highway 5 North
Buffalo, Minne ota 55313
Jet. T.N. 25 an C.R. 138
Telephone (612 682-7383
Facsimile (612) 682-7313
WAYN~LSON' P,E.
High ngineer
682.7388
VIRGIL G. HAWKINS. P,E.
Assistant Highway Engineer
682.7387
RICHARD E. MARQUETIE
Right of Way Agent
682.7386
v~.,.y Ok
,P ~
V '1.
J.- 2.
m
VI
o
.~i'"
WRIGHT COUNTY
DEPARTMENT F HIGHWAYS
December 8 1997
Rick W olfsteller, Administrator
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
P. O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: 1998 Maintenance Agreement
P'r;f-
Dear Mr.~lTe~:
It is once again time to renew our annual unicipal agreement for the maintenance
activities on the road(s) listed on the enclosed agre ment.
.
You may re-member that the costs used in omputing the reimbursement for the
maintenance agreements is the highest average ann al cost per mile for either the rural or
municipal roadway segments in the previous year. This is consistent with state-aid procedures.
In most cases maintenance activities are more costl in municipal areas therefore these are the
routine maintenance costs that are used in computi g the cost per mile for reimbursement. To
give you an idea of the cost for each maintenance ctivity we have shown the 1996 average
cost per mile for each activity in the 1998 main ten nce agreement.
I have enclosed two copies of the 1998 agr ement for your review and approval by the
City Council. Please return both copies of the executed agreement. After approval by the
County Board, one of the copies will be returned t you for your files. A check reimbursing
your city for the maintenance activities covered un er our 1997 agreement (which is enclosed),
will be sent to you under separate cover.
If you have any questions concerning this 0 if you note any discrepancies please don't
hesitate to contact our office.
Happy Holidays!
.
Enc.: (2) 1998 Mun. Maintenance. Agts.
(1) 1997 Executed Agreement
Equal Opportunity / Affirma iue Action Employer
5"~""1
/
MAINTENANCE A REEMENT - 1998
~
~
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and etween the City of Monticello hereinafter referred to as
file "City" and the County of Wright hereinafter referred to a the "County".
WHEREAS, Chapter 162, Minnesota Statutes, permit the County to designate certain roads and streets within the
City as County State Aid Highways, and
WHEREAS, the City has concurred in the designat on of the County State Aid Highway within its limits as
identified in County Board's resolutions of August 28, Octo er 8, November 5, December 3, December 27, 1957 and
January 7, 1958, and
WHEREAS, it is deemed to the best interest of all par ies that the duties and responsibilities of both the City and
the County as to maintenance on said County State Aid High ays to be clearly defined,
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED with regard to said County State Aid Highway maintenance:
That the City will be responsible for routine mainten ce on the following highways.
MAINT.
PLAN ROAD SEGMENT MILES COST /MI. * TOTAL COST*
c. CSAH 75 Willow St. to E. Jet. CSAH 39 3.74 1,789.97 $6,694.49
(Includes four lane portion.)
D. CSAH 39 From City Public Works BId . to 0.32 447.49 143.20
W. Jet. of CSAH 75
B. CSAH 75 Four lane portion 3.10 624.53 1,936.04
B. CSAH 39 -, From CSAH 75 to Kamp:, Ci . 0.40 624.53 249.81
. ESTIMATED TO r A = $9,023.54
That routine maintenance shall consist of the followin (Maint. Plan)
C. (CSAH 75) - Snow and ice removal.
D. (CSAH 39) - 25 % of the snow and ice remov 1.
B. One-time spring sweeping only.
*Based on 1996 average annual costs.
That when the City deems it desirable to remove snow y hauling, it shall do so as its own expense. The City shall
also be responsible for all snow and ice removal on sidewalks and other boulevard related maintenance outside the curb
or street area.
That the County will be responsible for all other main enance.
That the City shall indemnify, save and hold harmless e County and all of its agents and employees of any form
against any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of action of whatever nature or character arising out of or by reason
of the execution or performance of the work provided for herei to be performed by the City. It is further agreed that any
and all full-time employees of the City and all other employe s of the City engaged in the performance of any work or
services required or provided for herein to be performed by e City shall be considered employees of the City only and
not of the County; and that any and all claims that mayor mi ht arise under Workmen's Compensation Act of the State
of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engage and any and all claims made by any third parties as a
consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City e ployees while so engaged on any of the work or services
eovided to be rendered herein shall be the sole obligation an responsibility of the City.
~S..,,2.-
~
That the County shall indemnify, save and hold hannle s the City and all of its agents and employees of any ~
against any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of action of whatever nature or character, whether at law or equity,
arising out of or by reason of the execution, omission or perfon ance of the work provided for herein to be performed by
.e County including, but not limited to, claims made arisin out of maintenance obligations of County, engineering,
.sign, taking or inverse condemnation proceedings. It is furth r agreed that any and all full-time employees of the County
and all other employees of the County engaged in the performa ce of any work or services required or provided for herein
to be performed by the County shall be considered employees 0 the County only and not of the City; and that any and all
claims that mayor might arise under the Workmen's Comp nsation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said
employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by an third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on
the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein shall
be the sole obligation and responsibility of the County.
That in December of 1998 , the City shall receive pa ment from the County for their work. This amount shall
be based on the 1997 average annual cost per mile for routin maintenance on Municipal County State Aid Highways.
The average annual cost per mile will reflect only those costs a sociated with the areas of routine maintenance for which
the City is responsible.
ADOPTED:
,19_
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Clerk
-,
.
CERTIFIC TION
I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the
City Council of said City on , 19_.
City Clerk
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
Name of City
Chairman of the Board
Date
ATTEST:
County Coordinator
Date
.
(Sheet 2 0 2)
S-S-,3
.
.
.
7.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
Danner Truckinll. (J.O.)
Bob Danner of Danner Trucking req ests that the City consider approving
vacation of a portion of Marvin Road adjacent to the Danner Trucking site.
Under this proposed vacation, half 0 the right-of-way will become the
property of Danner Trucking, and th other half goes to future City property/
Dundas Road right-of-way to the wes . This action will enable Danner
Trucking to obtain a portion of the la d that is needed to develop the site
plan as approved under item 5F abov . In order to complete the site, Danner
Trucking will need to gain title to th City half of the vacated property along
with the remnant property left over fter City acquisition of Dundas Road
right-of-way. At present, the City At orney is working on obtaining title to
the land area needed for Dundas Roa via the condemnation process. Once
the City obtains title to the area nee ed for Dundas Road, the remnant
portion remaining will be combined 'th the "City" share of Marvin Road.
The City will then need to sit down 'th Danner and negotiate a sale price on
the land necessary to round out the anner Trucking site.
B.
ALTERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve vacation of portion of Marvin Road adjacent to the
Danner Trucking site between ighway 25 and Cedar Street.
1. Motion is contingent on ompletion of the condemnation process
for acquisition of Dunda Road.
2. Motion is contingent on evelopment of an agreement between
the City and Danner reg rding sale of land to Danner.
Under this alternative, one-hal of the property will go to Danner
Trucking, and the other half go s to the other side (future City). The
result of this vacation is unlike vacations that occur in the original
plat of Monticello. In those sit ations, once the vacation occurs, the
land becomes the property ofth City. For vacations that occur on
roads developed outside of the lat, vacated streets are split 50/50
between the adjoining properti s.
2. Motion to deny vacation of a po ion of Marvin Road.
18
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
C.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends pproval of the vacation as requested.
City staff will be working with the Cit Attorney and Jim Fleming to
determine the best method for transfe 'ng the rest of the property needed by
Danner to the Danner site in order for the property to be developed as
proposed, At the present time, we ha e not entered negotiations as to what
the appropriate purchase price would e for the land that would be conveyed
to Danner, It is proposed that this to ic be discussed at an upcoming
meeting of the City Council at such ti e that the condemnation process of
the Dundas Road right-of-way is com ete.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map showing site plan and street vac tion area.
.
.
19
....
r
~"
"
"... ...
-
Q,l
~~
eu"O
~ eu ~
~ ~ -
-~"O
=: III eu
~ ... ~
'€ -a ~
~ =: t:l
0. = ..
"O~c
Q,l Q,l =
~a~
'-ol_"",
~ ~ ~
..., "0 =
"C =.S
- Q,l eu 1::
J:-="O~
=1::=0.
Eg~as
-""'=:-
"0 ~ .... 5
= =:->eu
.~ .s ~ ; :;..
~ III ~_
== as = ~ =
= 1;; E = 8
- .... - Q,l eu
~ III ~ Q,l'-'
~'eilll ...., it: "0
\Ii) "0 ~ =
-~ = =.8"0
_ =..9"0;
- -~=
= Q,l = eu "0
~ Q,l .... - =
-=c~.s
rJJ = _
- ~ = =
= .s-=
"0""'_-
Q,l ~ = "'"
U = = ~
"",~El-_
~ '': Q,l J: Q,l
ct:: = "0 III =
.... '-ol CI = =
~~e~~
..
Qj
a..
-S
0'
Qj
a..
CJ
Z
-
~
U
~
~
~
~
:z
~
~
. . .
F
"
~
-
"0
=
.s
"'"
~
-
J:
III
=
E
-
"0
=
eu
"Z
f:
-
r./':J
""
=
as
u
"'"
~
=
~
'€
~
0.
eu Cl.l
""" -
~ ';':
= Q,l
.S "Z
- -
= 0.
~ ~
> '-ol
"0 Q,1
=-
eu.Cl
g ~
~ ~
eu eu
'-ol-
e::
'E ~
Q,l ""
- Q,l
= ==
- =
= eu
~~
\
\
---
I
I
I
I
\.......
. ....
v
CD
V
..-
-
(.')
Z
i_ ......
IC>
i-J
I.......
i::>
!eI)
/
"
"
.
I, ;
I' :
...........~t8Gj )
....
J
, ,
,.~. ,~
o
-
,., U-
-'.
1.O
v
N
LO
t")
.'
",,;
~,.
>.
, I
\
\
\
\
l..... w.-
\
,. "
, I I
.. ',;0 .! Z L L
j)
....-
....~
"
:-J I
.L....-~ '.1 //
.~
NOTE:
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXlMATE.
TOTAL PARCEL = 50867 Ft 2.
... )50 WM'-od ~ Ollloe
~WSI3 ~~.:-~
__....;:. '1Z'",_
".1&1*"-,,, J_ f... $oI,,'1l)Q
IllrAASTlIUCl\J:..:.1\E . ~,NCINUIl' - l>IANll'R5
.lll.la
m Trunk H"gbway 2S
City of Monti cell . Minnesota
". J\
, ,
..... :
" ,
,.'
"
....
I.l1
l.O
1"11
C\j
!)
.,..'
,
I
N:
--
~
0.'
- '-1
0-.,.
O'i
I
J. "
.-;.... .,. ;
"
,
I
I
,
, ~
'i
I
!
,.......;
v~
llJ ;
b!
CZJ:
~!
"'Oi
0;
Ui
\i
.~:<t
I
i ,
I .
'..
I
,
I
I
I
!
~
d)
~
rJ)
.%
~
u
~
~
r:fl
o
0.
o
.\..ool
P-4
I
i
,-
,
,
,
Dundas Road
,.-
,,-
..... - ..-
.... . --I
n l:i ~o
WSB Pra,od No. 1033.00
DIll!: lit 2.5, l'ilIll
Danner Trucking
Parcel Layout
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
8.
(NAC)
The Monticello-Big Lake Hospital Dis rict has requested that a portion of
Hart Boulevard, from its intersection 'th CSAH 75 (Broadway) to the east
limits of the Mississippi Shores prope y, be vacated to facilitate the
expansion of the various uses on the h spital campus. The vacation would
allow more effective use of the area fo parking necessary to serve both the
present hospital needs and the future expansions.
The purpose of proceeding with the va ation at this time (prior to
consideration of the final planned uni development) is to provide assurance
that the vacation issue will be resolve and that site planning can continue
on this basis. The final PUD will be c nsidered by the City in February. The
resolution of the Hart Boulevard righ -of-way is one of the primary
controlling factors in the design of the Hospital's short-term and long-term
growth. Moreover, this design impact a number of on-site and off-site land
use and traffic issues. Most significa tly among these would be access to
CSAH 75 for those other properties w ich currently depend on Hart
Boulevard, and coordination with the chool District and County to provide
appropriate, coordinated access from e other side of CSAH 75.
City staff has worked with the Hospit 1 representatives over the past several
weeks examining the impacts of the v cation. In addition to considering
impacts to the county highway and Sc 001 District, access and egress to the
City's new wastewater treatment pIa t have been subject to extensive review
and discussion. At issue has been a c ncern that sludge-hauling trucks
leaving the WWTP would not be able 0 negotiate a turn onto CSAH 75 from
the driveway location near the east e ge of the WWTP property. The only
workable options were found to be ex ension of a new frontage road farther to
the east to provide adequate turning pace (including acquisition of land and
a house), or continued use of the Hart Boulevard route to the west (through
what will be Hospital property if the acation is approved).
The Hospital representatives were at rst reluctant to consider the use of
hospital driveways for sludge truck r uting; however, due to the lack of
feasible alternatives and the importa ce of the access design to the Hospital
District, the Hospital representatives have agreed to request vacation with a
reservation of access to the City for it sludge trucks. The Hospital has asked
that the City permit the Hospital to b involved in the discussions of
scheduling the sludge hauling operat' ons so as to compatibly coexist with
hospital activities.
20
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
The City's interest in this section ofH rt Boulevard (in addition to sludge
truck access) is in preserving access fI r other affected properties, protecting
its investment in public utilities belo the surface, and recovering its costs
when divesting property. With regar to other properties, the Hospital
Administrator has indicated that all a ected property owners have expressed
verbal approval of the vacation, conti gent upon the Hospital providing
access through its property to CSAH 5. The City does not have written
documentation of this approval. Any pproval of the vacation should be
conditioned upon the Hospital providi g copies of the access agreements for
all property owners, including Tim Ra ley, Helen Wulf, Monticello Dental
Clinic, and Mississippi Shores.
With regard to utilities, the City will etain easements over the areas in
which its utilities are located. The Ci y Engineer and Public Works Director
will identify the extent of such easem nts. Finally, the City's policy has been
to collect a price for land which it con eys to others. Hart Boulevard is one of
the roadways in which the City has fe ownership rather than mere right-of-
way. As a result, the City is asking $ .61 per square foot for its street area.
The Hospital has requested that this ee be waived. A copy of the Hospital's
letter is attached to this report.
.
Most other issues remain separate fro the Hart Boulevard vacation issue.
These include site planning issues su h as the location of the helipad or
County consideration of a traffic sign I at the new hospital/school
intersection. The helipad will be reso ved as a part of the PUD review, and
the traffic signal does not involve or i pact City transportation issues.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve the vacation of a portion of Hart Boulevard as
requested by the Monticello-Bi Lake Hospital District, subject to the
following conditions:
a. Approval of the first pha e final planned unit development is
granted in upcoming mo ths.
b. The Hospital provides do umentation of access easement
agreements with neighb ring property owners as discussed in
this report.
c.
The City retains utility e sements over its utilities as
recommended by City pu lie works and engineering staff.
.
d. The Hospital executes it purchase agreement with the School
District for land on the n rth side ofCSAH 75.
21
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
e.
The City receives $0.61 p r square foot for its existing fee
interest in Hart Bouleva d.
f. The City retains an acce s easement through Hospital property
for access and egress to SAH 75.
2. Motion to deny the vacation of portion of Hart Boulevard.
3. Motion to table action on the v cation subject to additional
information.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the vac tion as discussed in alternative #1.
These conditions permit the City to pr tect its interests and allow the
Hospital to continue its planning for f1 ture expansion. The vacation would
formally occur upon satisfaction of all of the proposed conditions.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Exhibit A - Hospital Administrator's I tter dated 12/31/97.
.
22
RECEWED J~N S 199?
OMMUNITY HOSPITAL DISTRICT
((:,12) 2~5-2C14!'i
(& 12) 2c"., ,'i 111,
(fi1).) 195-4001
((,12) 2(15-4111
12/31/97
Mr. Stephan Orittman
Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc.
5775 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 555
St Louis Park, MN 55416
.
Dear Steve:
This letter will bting you up to date on .the remainin issues related to OUI request to have a
portion of Hart Boulevard vacated.
A purchase agreement between the School District d the Hospital District has been signed be
the Monticello School Board of Directors. The Hos ital District Board of Directors will approve
this agreement at the January 8 Board meeting. See copy attached.
Access agreements are beini prepared by the Hospi District Attorney between the private
property owners who now use Hart Boulevard to Ie S5 County Road 15 and the Hospital
District. The private property owners include the M nticello Dental Clinic, Helen Wulf, Tim
Ramley. and Mississippi Shores. I have spoken wi all the property owners and have obtained
their verbal approval. Final do(;uments including Ie .at property descriptions will be completed
next week for the property owners to sign.
~ . , , I "
.
Exhibit A - Hospl I Admin. Letter -12/31/97
f--/
. 12131/97
Mr. Stephan Grittman
(Cont'd)
1 would also request that the Monticello City Counc' members consider granting the vacation of
a portion of Hart Boulevard at no cost to the Hospi District for the following reasons:
a. Sewer and water easements will be retain d.
b. Access for the sludge truck will be retaine .
c. Water and sewer line replacement and e gement will be completed during
construction of District parking and bull . g facilities.
d. The City will receive building permit fees for the major buildings being
constructed.
e. No facility building can take place oVer vacated street.
[. Future maintenance of the street will be th responsibility of the Hospital District.
Tim Sessions, B WBR Architects, has sent new site lans to the City as of 12-29-97.
.
I have also enclosed a letter from Don Hozempa, W ght County Sheriff, regarding traffic control
during helicopter landing and take off at the Hospi . The Sheriff's deputies will respond as
requested to provide traffic control during these time .
Please call me if you have further requests prior to ' January 12, 1998, Monticello City
Council meeting.
Sincerely.
J'~~
Barb Schwientek, Executive Director
BS:ld
Enclosure
cc: Rick Wolf stellar
Wanda Kraemer
Tim Sessions
.
z~-z....
TOTRL P.12I6
.
.
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
9.
. .
residential lots. (R. W.)
Last spring, the Council was informe that the City would be soon acquiring
15 lots in the Meadow Oak Estates su division that were being forfeited for
nonpayment of taxes and special asse sments. Of the 15 lots, it was planned
that 2 or 3 of the lots along Meadow ak Lane would likely be kept by the
City for use as part of the ponding in he Meadow Oak Estates development
because of the topography of the lots, nd an additional lot was needed for
the entrance into the Eastwood Knoll evelopment off of Meadow Oak
Avenue. The result was that the City expected to have 11 or 12 additional
lots that could be sold and put back 0 the tax rolls.
A number of potential sale methods w re discussed by the Council in April,
and it was suggested that I obtain a arket analysis from local realtors as to
the value of the property before the C'ty would sell the property. I had
contacted Dale Florek of Edina Realt , our marketing agent for the city lots
in Eastwood Knoll, and inquired as to his opinion of the value of these
various lots. Mter further review of t e topography next to the pond, it
appeared that the City would only ne d to keep one of the lots at this time as
long as we revised the drainage ease ent for the other lots that abut the
pond. The result is that 13 lots could e made available for sale for
residential buildings.
With Mr. Florek being familiar with t e area, being our marketing agent for
the Eastwood Knoll lots, it was his op nion that the value of these lots would
likely be in the $16,000 to $20,000 ra ge. This was somewhat based on the
fact that these lots were slightly smal er than those available in Eastwood
Knoll and because of their proximity t the freeway noise. As a comparison,
some of the lots near the entrance to e Eastwood Knoll plat are slightly
larger than those being offered for sal along Meadow Oak Avenue, and they
are priced at $22,900 to $24,900. I a1 0 contacted Dan Goeman of Goeman
Realty to get his opinion on what he t ought the value of these lots might be.
Re, likewise, estimated the value at $ 5,000 to $18,000 depending on how
fast the City wanted to move them.
Although I had originally felt these 10 s would be valued in the $20,000 to
$24,000 range, that may have been a ittle high when looking at our
Eastwood Knoll property that has so e lots in the low 20's that have not yet
sold after three years. The Eastwood 011 properties are beginning to move
a little quicker; and with the activity hat's happening in the area, I think
the rest of the lots will sell in a reaso able amount of time.
23
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
I had previously been contacted by a fi w individuals who had expressed
interest in buying a single lot but chose not to pursue that option at that time
due to the preference of trying to mar et the entire property as one package.
With some of the properties having ex ess material and some lots needing fill
material, I thought possibly one build r or developer would be more
interested in the lots if there was a pI ce for them to move the material from
property to property.
.
Recently, a home builder from the me ro area that has been building in the
Klein Farms development expressed a serious interest in wanting to
negotiate the purchase of these lots. aving recently obtained all of the title
work and abstracts for these parcels, e lots are now available for building,
and I felt the time was right to offer t e property for sale so that they can get
back on the tax rolls as soon as possib e. Rather than singling out one
builder and beginning negotiations, I ecided to advertise the properties for
sale through the bid process, and I ad ertised in the Monticello Times for
three weeks. A package of informatio was mailed directly to builders and
developers and other parties who hav expressed interest in this property in
the past. Terms were even offered th t would have proposed the option of
allowing anyone to purchase the prop rty with a 20% down payment on a
contract for deed basis with the requi ement that each lot being built upon
had to be paid in full prior to construe ion commencing. In addition, I had
prepared restrictive covenants that 0 tlined the minimum building design
standards that structures would have to be built to on these lots that was
compatible with the current buildings in the Meadow Oak Estates
development and also compatible wit our restrictive covenants in the
Eastwood Knoll development. Becaus these lots would not be able to
sustain the covenants that pertained 0 the Eastwood Knoll development,
some of the square footages and build ng values were reduced, but I still
think the covenants would provide for very acceptable housing from a market
value and appearance standpoint tha would be compatible with the area.
.
To my dismay, I had only received on bid proposal from a local builder by
the bid date of Tuesday, January 6. he bid that the Council is asked to
consider is from Vie Hellman Constru tion for the purchase of all 13 lots at a
total cash price of $225,000. This wor s out to an average price of $17,307
per lot. While I believe this is at the I wer end of what I had originally
expected the value to be, the offer is fi r a cash settlement with a closing on
April 1, 1998, and would relieve the C'ty of all of the lots at one time and
possibly get them on the tax rolls qui er than if we were to market them
separately. Naturally, the City Coun 'I has the option of rejecting any or all
bids that we received and consider ot er options for the sale of these
properties, including negotiating with Mr. Hellman or other builders, or
simply offering the properties for sale to individuals by allowing Dale Florek
of Edina Realty to market them simil r to the Eastwood Knoll lots, We
24
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
would have to establish a price per lot 0 do that and, ultimately, I'm not sure
if we would generate any more revenu than the bid proposal we currently
have when you factor in the time dela it would take to sell the lots and after
paying a real estate commission of 10 of the sale price. I think some of the
lots are certainly more valuable than 17,000; but after factoring in all of the
additional costs, the offer before us m y be very acceptable.
Although it's hard to tell whether or n t their interest still remains in these
lots, a builder who had serious interes in these lots indicated the reason
they did not bid was that they were s ort staffed during the holidays and
simply forgot about the deadline until it was too late. Whether they would
have offered more remains to be seen, but it is unfortunate that we only have
one bid to consider.
1.
Council could award the sale of the 13 lots to Vic Hellman
Construction in the amount of 225,000 with an April 1 closing as
requested.
o ~'-u
0:JS
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
.
Acceptance of this offer should e contingent upon the public works
department obtaining the nece sary drainage easements that would
apply to any of the lots that are abutting the Meadow Oak pond prior
to the closing. The sale of the roperty would also be subject to the
restrictive covenants outlined i the bid package.
2.
Council could reject the bid rec ived at this time and attempt to
continue negotiations with any interested builder/developer for the
purchase of all of the lots as a ackage.
3.
Council could reject the bid rec ived and market the properties by
adding the parcels to the existi g real estate listing we have with
Edina Realty and Dale Florek.
Under this alternative, City st ff and Dale Florek would have to
establish a listing price for eac lot.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
.
Subject to the restrictive covenants bing proposed, it is my opinion that it is
in the City's best interest to get these parcels in private hands and back on
the tax rolls as soon as practical. Ie I'm disappointed that we only
received one bid, the bid we did recei e appears to be within reason when
considering it to be a cash offer for th total 13-lot package. In discussing the
25
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
bid with Dale Florek of Edina Realty, e also agreed that the cash offer from
Vic Hellman was a fair one and shoul be accepted by the City. While it
appears that residential building lots ith all improvements in and paid for
should sell for more than $20,000, the close proximity of some of these lots to
the freeway visibility and noise may b what's holding back the value. I
believe Mr. Hellman, in following our ovenants, would be able to build
adequate homes for the area; and by a cepting the only bid we received, the
City would not have to wait for all of t e lots to be sold individually and can
continue focusing on the sale of the E stwood Knoll lots through the realtor.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map depicting lots to be sold; Restric 've covenants proposed for the
development; Bid proposal forms.
.
.
26
:-. : ,: ,:,
....
.
/
LLJ
1-
~ <(
1-
en
LLl
"1
en
LLl 1-
~ Cl
<1: ~
t-
o :":1
0
0
tf 0 0::
<(
~ i 1--1
0:
OJ
(I)
~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
0
Q ~
~
0 ~
~
-J
5
Lu <:
..... ~
~ 8
~ ~
u:.
.6 C/)
~
.....
C'W)
,...
~
::-_~-L
I
I 'ON I~Ol~;l!lIann~; ~illO,l.IiJnV .~o .tHV d
./.
.
:. ..}
.......
. . .
'1---1
.
.
.
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
EASTWOOD KNO L 2nd ADDITION
AND MEADOW AK ESTATES
Land Use and Buildin~ Type. Each ot shall be used exclusively for
residential purposes. No building s all be erected, altered, placed, or
permitted to remain on any lot othe than one detached single family
dwelling, together with appurtenant garage, fence, swimming pool, or
accessory structure.
1.
2.
Architectural Control. No building shall be placed, erected, or altered on any
lot until the construction plans and pecifications and the plans showing the
nature, kind, shape, height, materia s, and location/setback of the structure
have been approved in writing by th Architectural Control Committee (ACC)
as to the quality of workmanship an materials, hannony of external design
with existing structures, and as to t e location with respect to topographic
and finish grade elevation. All buil . ng plans and designs and exterior colors
shall be reviewed by the ACC for the purpose of ensuring that the principal
street frontage exposure of building( ) are constructed of materials such as
stucco, cedar, redwood, or other acce table low-maintenance materials, and
brick accents, or a combination ther of.
3.
Each single family dwelling constru ted on any lot within the developer's
property shall, together with improv ments appurtenant thereto, have
sufficient architectural characteristi s and interior square footage to create
the image of a market value, as dete ined by the ACC, of not less than One
Hnndred Ten Thousand and 00/100 ollars ($110,000.00).
Other items to pertain to all properti s are:
· All yards shall be sodde or seeded to the rear corners of the
house from the curb (allowances may be made for using native
ground cover).
· All driveways shall be c ncrete, asphalt, or equivalent hard
surface.
· Home foundation footp 'nt minimums, excluding garages and
porches, shall be:
*
For Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Eastwood Kno112nd Addition;
and Lot 4, Block ,Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, Meadow Oak
Estates:
Rambler - (1) sto y nn__ 1175 with 3-car garage
Two-story --------- ___m__ 925 with 3-car garage
Multi-level -------- ------- 1400 with 3-car garage
EASTW2MO.COV: 12/11/97
q,2.
Page 1
.
4.
.
.
. Roofs shall be a minim of 8/12 pitch unless flatter pitch is
necessary to accommoda e an architecturally-significant design
feature of the home.
.
20% of the front elevatio shall be done in brick or stone.
NOTE: 3-car garages may not e mandatory if the ACC decides the
home has the architectural int grity to carry the valuation without it.
· Home foundation footpri t minimums for all other lots shall be
as follows:
Rambler umnu___ -------
Two-story ________u n_____
Multi -level ___u___ n______
Split-level --------- __nnn
1100 with 2-car garage
900 with 2-car garage
1350 with 2-car garage
1000 with 2-car garage
· Roofs shall be a minim of 7/12 pitch unless a flatter pitch is
necessary to accommoda e an architecturally-significant design
feature of the home.
Temporary Rtrllctures. No structure f 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. I structures shall be completed and
finished on the exterior within nine onths after commencement of the
excavation or construction thereof an before the structure shall be used as a
residence. No dwelling shall be cons ructed of concrete blocks or blocks of a
similar type on any lot unless the out r exterior walls above grade are of a
decorative variety which meets ACC pproval.
5. Nuisances. No accumulation of junk, garbage, or debris may be maintained
on any lot. No trailer house, travel tailer, buses, trucks, camper trucks, or
junk cars are allowed to be stored on remises unless properly garaged. No
livestock shall be kept on the premis s except for two dogs and two cats. No
breeding or boarding kennels will be ermitted. Dogs and cats will not be
allowed to run free, Dogs must be pr perly kenneled and must not be
allowed to bark uncontrollably, Ken els must be of chain link fencing and
set on concrete slabs, A site barrier nee blocking the view from the street
and screening from neighboring prop rties may be required by the ACC, All
kennels must be approved by the AC .
6,
Architectural Control Committee. T e architectural control committee shall
consist of the City of Monticello Buil 'ng Official and/or a designated
representative of the developer. The Building Official and/or the developer's
designated representative shall revi w all building structure plans and
specifications for adherence to the co enants and restrictions that relate to
minimum building standards along 'th the harmony of the exterior design
and location in relation to surroundi g structures,
't---~
EASTW2MO.COV: 12/11/97
Page 2
.
.
.
7.
Tree Preservation. The building plan shall include all survey information
required by the City. The survey sha 1 also show the location, variety, and
approximate size of mature trees loca ed within 35 feet of all construction
and grading activity. The ACC shall eview grading and site development
plans for adherence to the objective 0 saving as many mature trees as
possible. The ACC has the authority 0 require that reasonable efforts be
made to preserve trees. Such efforts i clude construction of retaining walls
and the like. The ACC may require a minimum of two 2-inch diameter trees
planted in the front yard if the yard i barren. Landscape plan must be
submitted for reviewal.
8. .Tenn. The covenants, conditions, an restrictions of this declaration shall
run with and bind the land comprisin the developer property and shall be
enforceable by the declarants, the ow ers, and the respective legal
representatives, heirs, successors, an assigns for a term of ten years from
the date this declaration is recorded, fter which time said covenants,
conditions, and restrictions shall be a tomatically renewed for successive
periods of ten years. The provisions ereof shall be deemed independent and
several, and the invalidity or partial i validity or unenforceability of anyone
provision or portion thereof as may be determined by a Court of competent
jurisdiction shall not affect the validit or enforceability of any of the other
provisions hereof. This declaration m y only be amended by a written
instrument signed by the developer a d all owners of the developer property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties heret have set their hands this
of May, 1996.
day
DEVELOPER
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By:
Mayor
By:
City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF WRIGHT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledge
,19_, by William Fair,
City Administrator, of the City of Monticello
behalf of said municipality.
before me this day of
e Mayor, and Rick W olfsteller, the
a Minnesota municipal corporation, on
Nota
-'4
EAS1W2MO.COV: 12111197
Page 3
.
.
.
PROPOSA FORM
FO
PURCHA E OF
THIRTEEN (13) RESIDEN IAL BUILDING LOTS
FROM THE CITY 0 MONTICELLO
To the City Council
City of Monticello
Monticello, MN 55362
Gentlemen:
I (we) submit the following offer for the purc ase of thirteen (13) residential lots
identified on the map supplied with the pro osal form:
TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE
$ 22 ,000.
The above bid is a cash c;l or contract for d ed D offer (check appropriate box).
The undersigned certifies that the restrictiv covenants pertaining to building
requirements for these lots have been caref ly examined and agrees to enter into a
purchase agreement for the lots within thirt (30) days of bid opening.
Accompanying this proposal is the bid secu ty required to be furnished in the
amount of 2% of total, the same being subje t to forfeiture in the event of default by
the undersigned.
In submitting this proposal, it is understood that the right is reserved by the Owner
to reject any or all proposals and to waive i ormalities.
This proposal may not be withdrawn after t e opening of the proposals and shall be
subject to acceptance by the Owner for a pe 'od of thirty (30) calendar days from the
opening thereof.
If a corporation, what is the state of incorpo ation:
If a partnership, state full names of all co-p .rtners:
Victor Hellman Const.
See attached addendum
BLGLOT .PRP: 12/19197
q.;~
Page 1
.
Attached addendum for 13 residential
All 13 lots are to be buildable.
With 13 deeds and abstracts.
Clear of all taxes and assements and
Closing date to be 4/1/98.
Seller:
City of ~onticello
.
.
1/6/98
i ty lots.
11 other expenses to closing date.
Buyer:
Victor Hellman Canst
L} Ii
' I
( ,.I" ./ -,. _'I .
~ I ItA 1f; 1):1.11" f:{vt/t=-----
'1.-;/"
.
__J
MONTICELLO
Office of the Cit:\, Administrator
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
MEMO
Phone: (612) 295-2711
Metro: (612) 333-5739
TO:
FROM:
DevelopersfBuilders of Residential Pr~~~~
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrat r0~
December 17, 1997
DATE:
RE:
City of Monticello Request for Bids for
the Purchase/Development ofThi een (13)
Single Family Residential Lots
.
The City of Monticello, through its City Council is offering for sale thirteen (13) single
family residential lots located in or near the Me dow Oak Estates development and
Eastwood Knoll development along the southea t corridor of the city. All lots have been
improved with sanitary sewer, water, storm se er, and street improvements. All
individual lot grading will be the requirement 0 the builder.
The City is seeking proposals from developers/b ilders who are interested in building
single family homes on these parcels in accorda ce with the covenants and restrictions the
City has established. The covenants are intend d to encourage development of homes that
will enhance the area and be compatible with a jacent or planned residences.
It is the desire of the City to sell the thirteen (1 ) lots as one package before considering
the option of individual lot sales. As an option 0 a cash purchase, the City would be
willing to consider financing the purchase by a ontract for deed at market rate interest
with a 20% down payment of the total bid price. Under this option, no building
improvements or tree removal would be allowe on any lot until the allocated purchase
price of the lot was paid in full. The purchase p . ce per lot would be determined by
dividing the total bid price offered equally by th thirteen (13) lots.
.
All bid proposals are due back to the City no lat r than 10 a.m., January 6, 1998. All bids
shall be accompanied by a certified check, cashi r's check, or bid bond in an amount equal
to 2% of the total purchase price. The bid see ty will be retained by the City from the
'1--7
.
Memorandwn
Sale of Residential Lots
December 17, 1997
Page 2
successful bidder until a purchase agreement is executed by both parties. If a purchase
agreement is not executed by the successful bid er within 30 days of the bid date, the City
shall retain the right to consider the bid in defa t and retain the bid deposit as damages.
Any questions regarding the lots, covenants, or erms of sale should be directed to Rick
Wolfs teller, City Administrator, at 295-2711.
.
.
q,g
.
.
.
lOA.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
City Council is asked to review the la est information on the project and
discuss the form and content of the pr sentation to the community on
January 20,1998. At the Council me ting on Monday, the task force,
architect, and financial consultant wi I be providing a presentation to City
Council that will outline the history b hind development of the community
center concept, design ideas, and pote tial methods of financing the project.
According to the project development nd construction schedule,
consideration of ordering plans and s ecifications is set to occur on
February 8,1998. This provides the ity Council with approximately one
month to refine the plan and alternat ves, communicate to the public, and
receive feedback. Following is a sum ary of recent developments:
CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION TO TASK ORCE: According to action taken by
the City Council on September 22, 19 7, by unanimous vote, the task force
was directed to move forward on the ore facility at the Walnut Street
location and prepare alternatives for nancing and timing of construction of
the aquatic center and ice sheet. The lease revenue bond option was selected
to allow construction to occur within he time frame needed by the National
Guard. The general obligation bond ( ote) option was not selected due to
time frames and because it was unlik ly that voter approval would be gained
due to shift in tax: impact from comm rcial property to residential property
resulting from the G.O. bond option.
TASK FORCE STUDY AND RECOMME ATION: The task force and Council
selected an architect and completed a extensive process of information
collection conducting eight user grou meetings, a business and organization
survey, and a community survey. In ddition, tours of community centers
were taken by senior citizens, the tas force, and the HRA. Thirteen percent
(13%) of residents responded to the s ey. Development of water and a
walking track were favored by the m jority of respondents. General support
for a community center was favored -1 over nonsupport, but people are cost
conscious. Support for the facility dr ps significantly if the tax impact
exceeds a 3% increase in taxes.
27
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
DESIGN RECOMMENDATION: As a res It of the continued study, the task
force is recommending that the core f: 'lity be expanded to include a slightly
larger gymnasium, walking track, an leisure pool. These features were
added despite the additional cost to m ke the facility an attractive and lively
place. The nature of the core facility as shifted from being primarily an
organization meeting space to both a lace for organizations and a well-
rounded center for family recreation. oth the YMCA and Community
Education have indicated a desire to e plore the potential of operating the
facility. The ice sheet is included in t e planning as an addition to the core
facility to be made at some point in th future. A conceptual design of the
layout will be provided at the presen tion on Monday.
FINANCING RECOMMENDATION: The sk force is recommending a
combination of lease revenue bonds a d sales tax revenue to fnnd the project.
This combination of funding keeps th tax impact below 3% of total taxes.
The HRA reviewed the project on J an ary 7, 1998, and, on a vote of 3-2,
entered into a letter of intent which s pports the concept of lease revenue
bond financing. In a related matter, ouncil is asked to consider adopting a
resolution authorizing a request for s les tax legislation. Mark Ruff of
Ehlers & Associates will be providing ore information on this subject.
.
The total project cost to consolidate t e city, seniors, youth, and family
services into a comprehensive facility s estimated at $10,497,000. Sticker
shock! In looking at the cost, please ote that it includes costs that the City
must face in the future. For instance, city hall expansion is needed one way
or another ($700,000 to build on to ex' sting building), senior center
expansion ($500,000) is also needed s on. Land purchase and redevelopment
of the "civic core" ($1.2 million) is a co t that the City will pay via TIF for any
future development of this area. ARe credits for National Guard funding
and the sale of City property, the tota amount funded by debt service is
$7,990,000. At the presentation on M nday, Mark Ruff will be providing
more information on funding options.
OTHER INFORMATION: At the meetin on January 7,1998, the HRA received
support for the project from residents and from the MCP. There was also a
petition for a referendum on the proje t.
OPERATIONS--YMCA OR COMMUNITY EDUCATION: Both organizations have
indicated an interest in operating the facility on a contract basis, which
would enable the facility to "hit the ound running" in terms of development
of programs and uses. The operation udget prepared by AKA shows an
operating deficit of $39,000. Please n te that Becker currently provides a tax
contribution of $220,000 to operation xpenses. I believe it is realistic to
expect the Monticello facility to requi e a subsidy somewhere between the
two.
.
28
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
The Minnesota Recreation and Parks ssociation is currently seeking
legislation providing $30,000,000 to 0 tstate Minnesota communities for
''Youth Initiative Programs." I am cu ently on the MRP A subcommittee that
is pushing this bill. We are a long wa from getting funds through this
program, but it is a chance worth purs 'ng.
INPUT FROM SCOTT DOUGLAS: City s aff contacted the fire department for
input prior to development of the site Ian options presented to the task
force. This input showed the importa ce of providing drive-through access to
the facility, and the site plan has bee developed accordingly. Scott Douglas
has indicated a concern about mixing he civic uses with the fire department
operation. The architect has emphasi ed his goal to prepare a site plan that
will allow the fire department to oper te safely along side the civic area. He
will be reviewing fire halls in other ci . es that operate in urban areas for
additional insights on methods for ass ring compatible site development.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Review the presentation by the architect and financing consultants
and consider authorizing the p sentation to the community on
January 20, 1998.
.
Under this alternative, City st ffwill prepare information on the
project for presentation to the c mmunity. The presentation will
consist of an information sessio followed by time for questions and
feedback. According to the pre ent schedule, a decision by Council on
authorization to proceed to the esign stage will be requested on
February 8, 1998.
2. Motion to deny authorization t proceed with the informational
meeting.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends hat Council review the planning
process to date and authorize staff to ollow through on the meeting
scheduled for January 20, 1998. Tou h decisions relating to this project will
then follow.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
.
Project memo; Summary of all option ; Memo on relationship of project to
comprehensive plan; Finance data an tax impact analysis worksheets.
29
0:
W
I-
Z
W
U
.~
<(
0:
I-
"C
r::::
III
>-
I-
Z
:J
~
~
o
U
o
..J
..J
W
U
i=
z
o
~
.
""
Oi
'"
.t:.
~
~
'"
'"
::l
co
'0
cl:
~
.
'"
o
....
'"
\
<1l
OJ
<ll
CL
<0 N
<0 ,....
<0 N oJ. 0:>.
oJ ,.... '" N
N <0. N.
,;f, '0 <II oJ,.... 0
~ ('). '" ,.... "!. ~
CO! 5l 0 0:>
to(') ~ '<to 0:> N
!!:!;.s:: U .,....
1::::' <l> <ON ,.... 0
('). .,....
"""'a: 10 <0
C. <I}
W <I}
r.n <I} <I}
>~ '<t 10
W lo't lo't 0 '<t
'" <D
0:,: <0
lO 0:> .,.... .,....
0 10
<0
'<t
CO "!.
'<t <0
u: <0 O. <0
"C '<t C')
<1l r.ri o. <D
<II
'S:: U;
w
0:
(ij't;
C 0
:2> U
o
(ij(;j
C 0
'en U
"\:: U;
o '
(J)
<
wi
Z
o
;:::
a..:
0:
..J
..J
'"
U.
o
>-
0::
'"
:;;
:;;
::>
r.n
lo't<l}
o
N
<D.
N
10
'C
w
>-
III
a;
o
....
w
~
'0
C
III
Ql
g
g
'0
{2,~
~ .u
o III
Uu.
- w
o ....
- 0
~~
U 0
>- 5 ~
~tiu
::! 2 0
U en Ql
<( :5 'e
u.ua.
w _
0:-;;;$
000
01-1-
00
00
N N.
MC')
C')C')
0c!.
Ili",
"'10
0>.,....
~o 0'
lZo",!
""':d,....
01010
C') 10 ,...._
.ollio:>
IO",CO
:!. N :::.
lo't lo't lo't
~~
::;:: .0
U III
~u..
Ql ~
.... 0
8u
- >-
0..0
"''0
w w
"'-
C ~
0) 0)
Q.c
>< Ql
UJo
010)
C :>
~ C
!'! 0)
~ili
00:
~~tu
I=-I=-z
og
~ C\J_
Mt')
C')C')
<D <D.
to,....
lo't lo't
C')CO
0"""
.,.... .,....
o
N
<D.
'<t
'"
'C
Ql
>-
ctl
Qi
o
Ql
U
>-
c:
o
ffi ,~ ~
l-iUo
c( :> '"
:: .r ,g
- ctl
:I: a :J
!::1ii.1
~8o
1= ,12 ~
~ti()
- :> -
U .... 0
c( ~ ,!!!.
lLae
wua.
a:-;;;-;;;
000
UI-I-
+
~OO'
lZo",!
NON
C')0C')
o co N.
uillio:>
mN(')
e"'~
lo'tlo't ~
>-z,
- c
60
<II '"
o ,~
""'iil
<ll :>
:> 0'
0'<(
<( >-
'0..0
<11'0
Ql Ql
<II -
C ~
<1l Ql
Q.c
>< Ql
Wo
DlQl
c :>
- c
!:! Ql
~ili
00:
~~tu
I=-I=-z
o
N
~
0:>
<0
w~
U '0
- '"
~ u. _
a:2
w..9!
I- Q.
-<< E
~8
:to
1--
- '"
::8
1= ,12
~ti
- :J
u.'::
<( '"
U. g ....
wu
c:-
o~
UI-
g~~
'0 0
0010
':] co "'.
~-~- ~
e<o
.... lo't lo't
r
\:,
'~
~
a
r
~~
""'5
o '"
~u.
Ql 2
~"*-
~l5
au
u >-
'0..0
<IIU
Ql Ql
~ ~
Ql Ql
o..c
>< W
Wo
,~ ~
- c
!'! w
Ql >
o..Ql
00:
-;;;~I-
- a W
I=-I-Z
~
Ii>
~
~
"
~
~
"
J
~
~
"li
.)
{)
LL
10 I/-
~
CL
(fJ
U
<1l
E
~
<(
<\l
y:
:>.
c
<1l
.:.!.
C
<(
co
Ol
r::
.,....
Q)
n;
o
C
:J
a:
-I
.
.
.
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
12179 Pl2l2
JAN 1218 '98 14:49
Monticello Community and Training Cent r
Project History
8Janu8.ry 1998
Evolution of the Community Center Conce
The prospect of a community center for Monticello has been discussed for some time. Discussions
became more formal in January 1996 when the pI for Monticello's downtown and riverfront wa~
initiated at a visioning workshop conducted by T resa Washburn. Participants at that workshop
were asked to identify and agree upon a list of tw nty element'> that would be needed to achieve
their "peIfect Monticello:' An "aquatic center wi 'n a community center" and a "community center
in downtown" were two of the twenty items iden' ed.
Without providing specifics, the city's Comprehe sive Plan (which was adopted in March 1996)
also identified a community center as an importa t component of the community, and suggested
that it be located in downtown. In a City Council goal setting session in June 1997, several goals
were identified that support the notion of a c mmunity center and locating the facility in
downtown. The following were considered to be . gher priority goals:
.
pursue development of a National Guard tr . . g facility in the community
purchase excess Burlington Northern right f-way in downtown'
develop summer recreation programs for y uth
develop a facility for roller bladers and ska boarders
act on initiatives of Monticello Community Partners
.
.
.
.
Other actions related to this project were also ide tified as goals, without being considered high
priority:
. relocate Ferrellgas and 1M Oil
· relocate City Hall
These events established a strong foundation ~ further exploration of the community center
concept as the Monticello Housing and Redevelo ment Authority and the Monticello Community
Partners began their study of the downtown and ri erfront area.
Relation of the Community Center Conce t to the Downtown and Riverfront Plan
The plan that resulted from that effort was b ed largely on a vision for the downtown and
riverfront that was created and conf1rmed throug an extensive community participation process.
The vision painted a picture of downtown using "broad strokes" to derme what the community
desired for its downtown. While it does not id tify a community center, the notion of such a
facility is integral to the vision:
When we look to the future of Monticell :s downtown and riverfront, we will see
something quite different from what exist today, although it will still befamiliar to
us. We will see downtown as a viral pa of our community, ~.trengrhened by its
connection to surrounding and distant eighborhoods, integrally tied to other
commercial areas, and viewed by residen 'S and visitors as the focus of community
life. It will reflect our community's cha acrer and rradirions, and trs acrtvity will
echo our spirit.
IO{t--2.-
. . .,._.~I.""""'-- ~
.
.
.
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
079 P03
JAN 08 '98 14:50
MOnD"lIo Communil)' unci TrlIillinl Cenl2l'
P"'J'u HlItory
8 JDlllIlII"Y 1998
PlIse 1
Downtown will be a place of activity, a lace that will be anractive to visitors
because of the way we use it. Downtown will awaken with the sunrise, and will
not close until well after dark. In many ays, it might become like a merry-go-
round - lively, energy-filled and in const t motion, stopping only briefly to lake
on new riders. It will be a place wher we shop, work, play, and meet our
friends, neighbors and business associat s, and it will be the place where the
community comes together for the civic fu cHons of Moncicello. When we gather,
it might be for a planned event that unites the entire community, or it might be a
more casual, serendipitous assembly of j t a few of us. But whenever we go to
downtown, and for whatever purpo~'e, the focus will be on the people of
Monticello.
The character of our downtown and rive ont will be a reflection of ourselves and
our environment. /t will focus on the iver, embracing it as a resource and
valuing it as an attraction. Our heritage a community will be demonstrated in
downtown, with buildings that lend a senS of permanence and public spaces that
encourage celebration and parricipation. The beauty of our downtown will be
balanced with its function, which will ensu e that the beauty we anticipate endures.
Our downtown and riverfront will be place that attracU' people to visit,
encourages them to spend time, and welco s their return.
We will accomplish this vision through cooperation, partnerships and tough
decisions. In the end, our downtown will tand as a testament ro our community s
ability to agree on what we need and des reo and our resolve to make it happen.
When we come together in downtown, it ill serve as a constant reminder of our
commitment to maintaining the life of a gre t small town as we grow.
To support this statement of vision and to further g ide the creation of the plan and the evolution of
the downtown and riverfront., a set of principles w re established. Again, several of these guiding
principles touch on the notion of a community cen :
A good place to do business
Downtown should be the place where t e Monticello community conducts its
personal, professional and civic business activities. Even as other areas exist to
provide goods and services, this area mus be recognized as the business center of
Monticello. Downtown needs to anrac and support quality businesses in an
environment that allows them to thrive, nd it needs to offer the range of goods
and services that the growing community monds.
A center for conununity. . .
Small towns need a heart, and for most they find it in their downtown.\'. For
Monticello, downtown should be its he rr - and it should be the focus for
community life. In downtown, the traditi ns of Monticello should be celebrated
and new traditions of community started, people should be drawn here not only
because of the goods and serVices avail bie, but because of its role in binding
together the people of the community in ape that reflects their spirit.
The vision and guiding principles were the fIrst c mponents of the downtown and riverfront plan
to be established, even before any plans had been drawn or directions set. They were intended to
provide a framework for evaluating concepts as ey evolved. and later. to aid in determining the
IOff -- 3
--..--.....
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
079 P04
JAN 08 '98 14:51
.
Monticollo Communi!)' lIIld Trnipin, Center
Project Bator,.
8 J IllIUIllY I !l98
l':aae 3
merits of projects proposed for the downtown an riverfront area. The final plan captured these
ideas in depiction of the possible fonn of downto development and in the activities that would
ultimately occur in downtown Monticello,
The plan that was endorsed by Monticello Comm 'ty Partners and adopted by the city is based on
a concept of a "new bridge" -- a component of the downtown which links the riverfront and
Broadway to a revitalized. mall near the interstate. alnut Street would become a new "main street"
for the downtown, and a civic and institutional orc would be situated on underutilized sites
between Sixth Street and the railroad.
.
The civic and institutional core .. the "new bri ge" -- would become a center of activity for
downtown, serving the civic and social functions of the Monticello community. The civic and
institutional core defined in the downtown an riverfront plan includes many of the same
components currently being discussed for the co munity and training center: a city hall, family
center and other features which function as "activ ty generators" for the downtown. The goal of
the downtown and riverl'ront pian is to .keep peopl in downtown and to create new uses that will
attract more people. The development of a co unity center in downtown serves exactly that
purpose.
Once the community center is established, the pI indicates that it provides a great opportunity to
spur new development activity in downtown. Th kinds of development that fit the facility are
those that generally relate to its use, such as offee and bagels shops and family-oriented
restaurants, While it is difficult to predict exactly hat "spin-off' development might occur, there
is anecdotal evidence of that kind of activity resul ing from the development of similar facility in
downtown locations.
City Policy Directing the Creation of a Co
unity Center in Downtown
.
To provide support for the plan as the appropriate direction for revitalization, the downtown and
riverfront plan was endorsed or approved by Monti eUo Community Partners, Monticello Housing
and Redevelopment Authority and the Planning C mmission. The downtown and riverfront plan
plan was then adopted as a pan of the Comprehens ve Plan by the City Council at a public hearing
in September 1997, becoming the policy that the city pursues for the downtown and riverfront
area. To augment the policy direction provide by the plan, implementation strategies were
established to set the community on a course for chieving their vision for the area. One of the
"early actions" defined in the plan is to "create a ci ic and institutional core." SpecifiC actions were
also defined; acquire sites or establish control 0 er sites for future civic facilities; and pursue
development of civic facilities by partnering with ther institUtions and agencies as opportunities
are presented.
Beyond the "early actions:' the plan laid out an overall strategy to guide the evolution of the
downtown and riverfront. Related to the fIrst gui 'ng principle - "a good place to do business,"
thc plan identifies a a specific strategy: create a r ason for people to come to downtown. Three
principle actions are critical, all as defined in the pI :"
. Develop centers of activity to draw more eaple into downtown throughout the day and
evening.
. symbol of the City in downtown and to a1 ow the business of the City to be conducted as
part of the business of downtown.
10 II -l/
,-.-....-..-...
.
-.
.
612-3386838
HOISINGTON KOEGLER
12179 P05
MQndcaUo ConunWlily IIIId Tra1lllng CClltcr
l'l'oJecl H1sll:lty
8 JUIIUlIt)' 1998
Puge 4
JRN 1218 '98 14:51
. Study the idea of a family center as a part of downtown. to make it a center of activity that
is different than commercial activities of owntown and to create an attraction that extends
the life of downtown throughout the day d evening.
The second guiding principle -- "a center for co unity" _a also relates to the development of a
community center. The specific strategy calls fo the creation of a civic and institutional core to
house the functions of the downtown that relat to the social and civic needs of the Monticello
community, and to create the "new bridge" b tween the downtown/riverfront area and the
highway-oriented commercial area. Again, sever actions area defmed in the plan:
. Establish control over parcels that encom ass the civic and institutional core as indicated in
the plan.
. Establish land use controls permitting ci ic and institutional uses in that part of the plflll
designated as the civic and institutional c reo
. Vacate 5~ 1/2 Street to provide addition land for new facilities between Pine Street and
Walnut Street, and to create more availabl and developable land between Walnut Street and
Maple Street.
. Plan for the eventual relocation of CilY all to the civic and institutional core in a location
that gives the building prominence from ine Street and Walnut Street.
. Pursue the development of a multi~use F . Y Center.
While the community expressed a desire for a co unity center, and the downtown and riverfront
plan set the facility in the context of downtown onticello, the specifics of the facility could not be
defined until the community became engaged i the process of actually developing a community
center. What the plan was able to accomplish wa to identify a reasonable site in downtown for the
facility, and to establish the "ground rules" for it development.
IOA-~
'jAN 09 '98 03:00PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
PREL.IMINARY. F r Discussion Only
of Monticello
Community Center Financing
Teak Force Recomma dation
Core Facility 1" Aquatic Center
FINANCE PLAN
Total Project Cost
less Upfront $
National Guard
Sale of City HalVSenior Center
City Office Share
MNDQT (Park 'n Aide)
Other
Total Cost to Finance
Finance Costs
Capitalized Interest
Rounding
2.50%
9
Total Bond Issue
ESTIMATED TAX IMP CT
.
Interest Rate
Term
Average Annual Debt Service
Funds To Pay Debt Service
% from Other Sources
leases
Sales Tax"
Other City Funds
City Tax L.evy
Estimated Tax Rate
Mark~t V.all&
30.000
60,000
90,000
120,000
Residential 150,000
Homestead 200,000
250,000
.. ..-1Ii
so,ooo
. 100,000
300,000
500,000
750,000
1,000,000
Com mercial 1 250000
Industrial "
1.500,000
1,750,000
2,000,000
"Sales tax ;s 1 % with large purchase and service exclusions.
.
Ehlers & Associates
01/09/98
10,497,272
1,500,000
500,000
1,000,000
50,000
o
7,447,272
199,632
338,376
4,720
7,990,000
l
e
5.65%
20
676,943
o
500,000
o
176,943
1.2449
P.2/3
G.O..,,,.B.~
5.15%
20
649.318
o
500,000
o
149,318
0.0318
Additional ~noual Tax
$3.73
7-47
12.79
19.70
26.61
38.12
49.64
$16.81
33.61
125.11
224.70
349.19
473.68
598.17
722.65
847.14
971.63
$9.53
19.06
28.59
38.12
47.65
63.54
79.42
$15.88
31.n
95.31
158.85
238.27
317.69
397.11
476.54
555.96
635.38
FIN_SUM.WK4
10 It ..,. ~
JAN 09 '98 03:00PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
Cit of Monticello
Community Center Financing
PRELIMINARY. For Discussion Only
Task Force Recommen atlon
Core Facility + Aquatic enter
FINANCE PLAN
Total Project Cost
Less Upfront $
National Guard
Sale of City HalVSenior Center
City Office Share
MNDOT (Park 'n Ride)
Other
Total Cost to Finance
Finance Costs
Capitalized Interest
Rounding
Total Bond Issue
.
Interest Rate
Term
Average Annual Debt Service
Funds To Pay Debt Service
% from Other Sources
City Tax L.evy
Estimated Tax Rate
Market Value
30,000
60,000
~ 90,000
~ 120,000
Residential 150,000
Homestead 200,000
250,000
.
50,000
100,000
300,000
500,000
750,000
1,000,000
1,250,000
1,500,000
1,750,000
2,000,000
Commercial
Industrial
.
Ehlers & Associates
2.50%
9
L.eases
Sales Tax
other City Funds
01/09/9
10,497,272
1,500,000
500,000
1,000,000
50,000
o
7,447,272
, 99,632
338,376
4,720
7,990,000
sa Revenue
5.65%
20
676,943
o
o
o
676,943
4.7626
Additionat~.nnual Tax
$14.29
28.58
48.94
75.37
101.80
145.86
189.91
$64.30
128.59
478.64
859.66
1,335.92
1,812.18
2,288.45
2,764]1
3,240.97
3,717.24
P.3/3
G.QJi.9Jm
5.15%
20
649,318
o
o
o
649,318
0.1381
$41.44
82.89
124.33
165.78
207.22
276.30
345.37
$69.07
138.15
414.45
690.75
1,036.12
1,381.50
1.726.87
2,072.25
2,417.62
2,763.00
FIN_SUM. WK4
lOft - 7
.
.
.
lOB.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
As you know, one of the potential me hods for funding a community center is
through use of a targeted sales tax. he proposed method for funding the
training and community center as re ommended by the task force and
discussed by the HRA includes establ shment of a sales tax. You may also
recall that the downtown redevelopm nt plan included establishment of a
sales tax as one of the possible metho s for assisting with funding of
redevelopment activity.
In the discussion of implementation 0 a sales tax, it has been noted that
such a tax would be targeted to a spe 'fic list of retail activities and would
likely exclude big ticket items such a automobiles and appliance sales.
Benefits of the sales tax include the a ility to generate revenue from sales
associated with the highway commer 'al activities in the community. As you
know, the level of traffic that passes ough Monticello creates an impact on
the community and indirectly results in additional cost for the City in terms
of traffic control, sidewalks/pathway evelopment, etc. Under a sales tax
option, the City could tap highway co erce sales associated with this
traffic.
In addition, a longstanding issue for he City is the continued provision of
services to residents outside of the cit of Monticello. Parks, libraries, senior
center, and other services are indirec ly provided to residents that do not
support City expenses through prope ty taxes. The sales tax option would
enable the City to collect some tax re enue from residents residing outside
the city limits. Some residents outsi e the city have recognized this problem
and support the sales tax idea as a w y for them to contribute toward
development of services in the city th t non-residents may desire.
B.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1.
Motion to approve authorizatio to request that Mark Olson sponsor a
bill which would allow the City to conduct a referendum on
establishment of a sales tax.
Under this alternative, Rusty ifield and Mark Ruff of Ehlers &
Associates will be working wit Mark Olson and other state legislators
toward development of a sales ax option for the City of Monticello. It
is likely that the Monticello sal s tax option will be combined with the
30
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
request by St. Cloud. In the ev nt that legislation is approved which
would enable the sales tax opti n to be voted on, it is likely that the
vote would occur sometime in S ptember of 1998.
2.
Motion to deny authorization t request that Mark Olson sponsor a bill
which would allow the City to c nduct a referendum on establishment
of a sales tax.
City Council should select this ption if it feels that it is not necessary
to establish a sales tax at this t me.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
.
It is the recommendation of the City dministrator that the City Council
authorize Mark Olson to proceed on s onsoring this bill. It is his view that it
makes sense for the City to diversify i s revenue-generating capability
through introduction of a sales tax. T e sales tax will tap pass-through
traffic and will enable the City to obt in revenue from people shopping in
Monticello from outside the city. The nal design of the sales tax program
adopted in Monticello will be determi ed at a point later in time. This design
would establish the types of retail sal s that would be targeted and would
have provisions for sunsetting. Perh s the sales tax would sunset at such
time that the community center devel pment is paid for.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Letter from Mark Olson; Excerpt fro Monticello Comprehensive Plan;
Resolution requesting establishment f a sales tax as prepared by Ehlers &
Associates.
.
31
.
Mark Olson
State Representative
District 19A
Wright and Sherburne Counties
Minnesota
House of
Representatives
COMMITTEES: EDUCATION; JUDICIARY; BOR, MANAGEMENT RELATIONS;
REGULATED INDUSTRIES AND ENERGY; HOU ING AND HOUSING FINANCE DIVISION
December 22, 1997
Bill Fair, Mayor
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Bill:
It was nice to see you at the Wright County Court ouse recently. You raised a concern about
the use of a local sales tax. I would like to respon and confirm that you, in fact, stated the local
option sales tax concern correctly.
According to Minnesota Statute 297 A.48, a city ay impose a sales tax if permitted by special
legislation. For instance, during the 1997 session provision allowing the city of Will mar to
implement a sales tax was included in the Omnib s Tax bill. This measure passed, thus enabling
Willmar to charge one-half of a 1 percent sales ta . If your city is interested in using a local sales
tax, as your state legislator I could offer a bill incl ding such a provision. Please find enclosed
the statute describing the imposition of a local sal s tax and a 1995 list of cities authorized to
impose a sales tax.
.
Thank you for making me aware oftrus concern. fyou wish to pursue the matter ofa sales tax,
_ please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
~
Mark Olson
State Representative
MO/lk
.
n
~~
17085 142nd Street, Bi Lake, Minnesota 55309
323 State Office Building, 100 Constitution Ave., 51. Paul, Minnesota 55155-129
Email: rep.mark.olson@house.leg.state.mn.us F
(612) 296-8803
10 6 --I
(612) 263-3500
(612) 296-4237
TOO (612) 296-9896
S~2
.
.
.
Minnesota Statutes 1997. Table of Chapters
Table of contents for Chapter 297 A
297A.48 Local sales tax rules.
Subdivision 1. Authorization; scope. (a) A political
subdivision of this state may impose a gene a1 sales tax if
permitted by special law or if the subdivis'on enacted and
imposed the tax before the effective date 0 section 477A.016
and its predecessor provision.
(b) This section governs the imposition f a general sales
tax by the political subdivision. The prov'sions of this
section preempt the provisions of any speci 1 law:
(1) enacted before its effective date, or
(2) enacted after its effective date tha does not
explicitly exempt the special law provision from this section's
rules by reference.
(c) This section does not apply to
on motor vehicles or a special excise
Subd. 2. Tax base. (a) The tax
taxable under this chapter that occur
subdivision.
sales tax
vehicles.
sales
political
(b) Taxable services are subject to a political
subdivision's sales tax, if they are perfor ed either:
(1) within the political subdivision, or
(2) partly within and partly without the political
subdivision and more of the service is performed within the
political subdivision, based on the cost of performance.
Subd. 3. Tax rate. (a) The tax rate is as specified
in the special law authorization and as imposed by the political
subdivision.
(b) The full political subdivision rate applies to any
sales that are taxed at a state rate less than or more than the
state general sales and use tax rate.
Subd. 4. Use tax. A compensating use tax applies, at
the same rate as the sales tax, on the use, storage,
distribution, or consumption of tangible personal property or
taxable services.
Subd. 5. Exemptions. (a) All goods or services that
are otherwise exempt from taxation under t is chapter are exempt
from a political subdivision's tax.
(b) The gross receipts from the sale of tangible personal
property that meets the requirement of section 297A.25,
subdivision 5, are exempt, except the qualification test applies
based on the boundaries of the political s bdivision instead of
the state of Minnesota.
(c) All mobile transportation equipment, and parts and
10 e-2..
12/16/979:53 AM
.
.
accessories attached to or to be attached
exempt, if purchased by a holder of a moto
permit under section 297A.211.
Subd. 6. Credit for other local taxe
paid sales or use tax to another political
tangible personal property or another item
this section, a credit applies against the
this section. The credit equals the tax t
other political subdivision for the item.
Subd. 7. Enforcement; collection; an
(a) The commissioner of revenue shall col
subject to this section. The commissioner
with the state sales and use tax. All tax
are subject to the same penalties, interes
provisions as apply to the state sales and
(b) A request for a refund of state sal
excess of the amount of tax legally due in
refund of the political subdivision taxes
services. The commissioner must refund to
amount of the political subdivision taxes
or use.
o the equipment are
carrier direct pay
If a person
subdivision on
subject to tax under
tax imposed under
e person paid to the
administration.
ect the taxes
may collect the tax
s under this section
, and enforcement
use tax.
s tax paid in
ludes a request for a
aid on the goods or
the taxpayer the full
aid on exempt sales
(c) A political subdivision that is col ecting and
administering its own sales and use tax be ore January 1, 1998,
may elect to be exempt from this subdivisi n and subdivision 8.
Subd. 8. Revenues; cost of collectio
commissioner shall remit the proceeds of t
and a proportionate share of the cost of c
quarterly, to the political subdivision.
deduct from the proceeds remitted an amoun
The
e tax, less refunds
llection, at least
he commissioner shall
that equals
(1) the direct and indirect costs of th department to
administer, audit, and collect the politic 1 subdivision's tax,
plus
(2) the political subdivision's proport'onate share of the
indirect cost of administering all taxes u der this section.
Subd. 9. Effective dates; notificati
political subdivision may impose a tax und
starting only on the first day of a calend
political subdivision may repeal a tax und
stopping only on the last day of a calenda
n. (a) A
r this section
r quarter. A
r this section
quarter.
(b) The political subdivision must noti y the commissioner
of revenue at least 90 days before imposin or repealing a tax
under this section.
Subd. 10. Application. This section applies to all
local sales taxes authorized on or after t e day of enactment of
Laws 1997, chapter 231. Starting January , 2000, this section
applies to all local sales taxes that were authorized before the
day of enactment of Laws 1997, chapter 231.
HIST: 1997 c 231 art 7 s 30
. Copyright 1997 by the Office of Revisor of tatutes, State of Minnesota.
2
106-3
12/16/97 9;53 AM
Minnesota Statutes 1997. Table of Chapters
. Table of contents for Chapter 477 A
477A.016 N@w taxes prohibited.
No county, city, town or other taxing authority shall
increase a present tax or impose a new tax n sales or income.
HIST: lSp1981 c 1 art 6 s 5
copyright 1997 by the Office of Revisor of statutes, state of Minnesota.
.
.
lob... tf
12/16/979:52 AM
LOCAL SALES TAXES
Special Provision: Authority has been given to the
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Conunission to tax lodging
and liquor at a variable rate in the City of Minneapolis.
Minnesota has a statutory prohibition against the imposition
of any.I~1 sales or income tax without specific legislative
authonzanon. Local sales taxes specially authorized are
listed here. *
Revenue
Collections: * C.Y. 1992 C.Y. 1993
Bloomington $5,904,000 $8,252,000
Duluth 9,048,000 9,940,000
Mankato 1,110,000 1,762,000
Minneapolis 29,594,000 31,029,000
Rochester 10,885,000 7,653,000
S1. Cloud 1,174,000 1,259,000
S1. Paul 1,829,000 3,437,000
Winona 144,000 159,000
Cook County 214,000 245,000
Scon County 370,000 287,000
Rate Tax Base
Bloomington; 6% Transient lodging
5% Liquor and beer
3% Admission to spectator events
Cook County; 1% State sales tax base (1/1/94)
2% Transient lodging in towns of
Duluth: Lutsen, Tofte, and Schroeder.
1% State sales tax base
1% Certain food and beverages
4% Transient lodging
6% Transient lodging - 30 or more
rooms
Mankato: 0.5% State saI es tax base
$20 Per motor vehicle sold at retail
Minneapolis: 0.5% State sales tax base
3% Transient lodging""
6% Transient lodging - more than
50 rooms....
3% Admissions, amusements, lodging
3% Liquor and beer (downtown,
on~sale only)
3% Restaurant food (downtown)
Rochester: 3% Transient lodging
0.5% State sales tax base
(I % before 1/1/93)
$20 Per motor vehicle sold at retail
S1. Cloud: 5% Transient lodging
1% Certain food and beverages
S1. Paul: 0.5% State sales tax base (9/1/93)
3% Transient lodging
6% Transient lodging - SO or more
rooms
Scott County: 25c Per paid admission to a large
place of amusement
Two Harbors; 1% Transient lodging (4/1/94)
Winona; 1% Transient lodging
.. Reflect collections from taxes imposed upon special
authorization.
Disposition; Local governments.
Administration
Agency: Minnesota Department of Revenue - collection of
Mankato, Minneapolis, Rochester, St. Cloud, and S1. Paul
sales taxes. Other cities and counties collect their own
taxes .
Who Pays: Purchasers or users of taxable goods and
services.
Who Remits: Holders of local sales tax pennits.
Due Dates: The 20th of the month fOllowing the sales
month.
History of Major Changes
1969 - Minneapolis imposed a 3 % tax on admissions,
amusements, and transient lodging.
1970 - 51. Paul, Duluth, and Bloomington imposed a 3%
tax on transient lodging.
1971 - Rochester imposed a 3% tax on transient lodging.
- Local governments prohibited by state law from
imposing or increasing sales or income taxes.
1973 - Duluth authorized to impose a 1 % general sales
tax.
1977 - Duluth authorized to impose a 2% tax on
restaurant sales of meals and drinks.
1979 - 51. Cloud authorized to impose a 3% lodging tax.
*
In addition to the specially authorized taxes listed here, all cities
and towns are authorized to impose up to a 3 % tax on transient
lodging. Proceeds from the tal( must be used for tourism
promotion.
"* State law provides that the cumulative tax on lodging in the city
of Minneapolis cannot exceed 12 %.
86
87
'O&-~
- ~etropolitan Sports Commission lodging and
lIquor lax authorized.
1980 - Duluth exempted from prohibition against
increasing rates without legislative approval.
1982 - St. Paul authorized to impose a lodging tax of
3 % '. At least 25 % of the proceeds to pay the debt
servIce on the civic center parking ramp.
1983 - Authorized an~ city 10 impose a lodging tax of up
to 3 % for touTlsm promotion.
- Rochester authorized to impose a general sales tax
of ~p to 1 % and an excise lax of up to $20 per
vehicle sold at retail.
1985 - Extended to towns the authority to impose a lOCal
lodging tax of up to 3 % for tourism promotion.
1986 - Minneapolis authorized to impose these taxes for
convention center funding: a 0.5% general sales
and use lax; a 3 % sales tax on liquor and beer and
on restaurant food (downtown only); and an
additional 3 % lodging tax on facilities with more
than 50 rooms.
- St. Paul authorized to impose an additional 2 %
tax on transient lodging facilities with 50 rooms or
more to fund a convention bureau.
- Bloomington authorized to impose a 1 % general
sales tax within a designated special district. The
city also authorized to impose a 5 % lodging tax
and a 5% sales tax on liquor and beer.
- 5t. Cloud authorized to fund a convention center
by imposing a 1 % sales tax on certain food and
beverages and an additional 2 % lodging tax.
1987 - Bloomington authority to impose a I % general
sales tax repealed.
- Cook COUllty lodging tax in certain towns
authorized.
- Scott COUllty admission tax authorized.
1989 - Rate for the generally-authorized transient lodging
tax increased from 3 % to 6 %, with the first 3 %
dedicated for tourism promotion.
1990 - Rate for generally-authorized lodging tax reduced
from 6% to 3%
- Bloomington authorized to impose an additional
1 % lodging tax.
1991 - Mankato authorized to impose a general sales tax
of 0.5 % and a $20 excise tax per motor vehicle
sold at retail. Proceeds to fund the Riverfront
2000 Project.
- Winona authorized to impose a lodging tax of 1 %.
Half of proceeds for a specified project; the
balance for tourism promotion.
88
~.
"
- St. Paul's authority to impose an additional
lodging tax on a business with 50 or more rooms
increased from 2 % to 3 % .
1992 - Brooklyn Center authorized to impose a 1 % tax
on restaurant food and on-sale liquor. Proceeds to
fund low-income housing projects. (Tax not .
imposed because referendum failed).
- Ely authorized to impose a general sales tax of
I % and an excise tax of $20 per motor vehicle
sold at retail. Proceeds to fund the Ely
Wilderness Gateway project. (Tax not imposed
because referendum failed).
- Rochester authorized to impose a general sales
and use tax of 0.5 % and an excise tax of $20 per
motor vehicle sold at retail. Proceeds for
specified capital improvements. (On 1/1/93
replaced expired 1 % tax).
- Roseville authorized to impose a 2 % tax on
lodging. Proceeds to fund a multi-use speed
skating and bandy facility. (Tax not imposed
because it was not placed on the ballot.)
- Thief River Falls authorized to impose a general
sales tax of 0.5 % and an excise tax of $20 per
motor vehicle sold at retail. Proceeds to fund the
Area Tourism - Convention Facilities. (Tax not
imposed because it was not placed on the ballot.)
1993 - St. Paul authorized to impose a general sales tax
of up to 0.5 % by resolution of the city coun~il.
Proceeds to fund the expansion and remodelmg of
the SI. Paul Civic Center complex and capital
projects to further residential, cultural,
commercial. and economic development
downtown and in the neighborhoods.
(Implemented 9/1/93)
Cook County authorized to impose a general sales
tax of up to 1 % by referendum. Proceeds to fund
the expansion and improvement of the North
Shore Hospital. (Approved, effective 1/1/94)
Garrison authorized to impose a general sales tax
of up to 1 % by referendum. (Tax not imposed)
1994 Two H:rbors authorized to impose by ordinance a
tax of up to 1 % on transient lodging. Proceeds to
be used for preservation and display of the rugboat
Edna G. (Implemented 4/1/94)
,
,'-".
",i'-
:t
-.
i
,of> ... (P
89
EXCERPT FROM COMPREH SIVE PLAN
Sales Tax
Some Minnesota cities hav sought and obtained special legislative authority
for a local sales tax. The fu ding potential of a local sales tax would depend
on its rate and application. sing 1994 tax revenue, a tax rate of 0.5% would
raise almost $325,000 in rev nue.
.
In addition to its funding c pacity, a sales tax offers other positive factors.
Depending on the enabling egislation, it could be used to finance any imple~
mentation action for the D wntown Plan. The availability of this revenue
would lessen the burden on ore traditional funding sources, such as property
taxes and special assessme ts. This tax also passes a portion of costs on to
non-residents.
A local sales tax produces oncerns about placing the community at an eco-
nomic disadvantage. If the ost is passed on to the customer. they may choose
to shop outside of Montice 10. If the business absorbs the tax, then it may
impair business developmen
.
1; AN.., .,'d..
~ Revltalillng Man/kef/a's Downtown and Riverfront
Page 4:20
IO~ ...,.,
.
11.
.
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
. (R.W.)
Minnesota Statutes require that at t e first meeting of each year, certain
appointments be made. Attached yo will find a list of the required
appointments that may be approved i one single motion unless the Council
chooses to consider some appointmen s separately.
a. City Depositories. Duri g the past year, three official depositories
were named, including arquette Bank Monticello, Metropolitan
Federal, and First Natio al Bank of Monticello. In addition, under
Minnesota Statutes 239, the Chief Financial Officer has also been
designated the authorit to name other official depositories for the
purpose of investments. Since financial institutions not within the
city are depositories for 'nvestment purposes only, the official
depositories are usually 'ust the three mentioned above, and the
motion includes the aut orization for the Chief Financial Officer to
designate other deposito . es when necessary for investment
purposes only.
b.
Official Newspaper.
c. Health Officer. Historic lly, Dr. Maus has served as the City
Health Officer, and it is uggested that this appointment simply be
renewed annually.
d. Actin~ Mayor. Past pra tice has been to choose the senior Council
member to fill in as the cting Mayor when needed. For 1997,
Clint has been appointe to this position.
e.
Three
appointments are neces ary for selecting the City representative to
serve on each of the foIl wing bodies: Community Education
Advisory Board, Joint F"re Board, and the OAA Board. For 1997,
Bill Fair was appointed 0 both the Community Education Advisory
Board and as the repres ntative on the OAA Board. In regard to
the Joint Fire Board, Co ncilmember Brian Stumpf and the City
Administrator were the wo City representatives on this board.
The other members of t e Joint Fire Board include two fire
department representat'ves and two Township Supervisors, those
currently being Ken Sca den and Ted Holker.
32
.
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
f.
Annually, one
appointment is required for the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority. The tenn cu ently occupied by Mr. Steve Andrews is
the one that expired Dec mber 31. The HRA committee has
recommended that Mr. drews be reappointed by the Council to
an additional5-year te
g. Planninli:' Comm-ission. he Planning Commission is made up of
five members serving on -year appointments. All current members
have indicated a willin ess to be reappointed for an additional
one- year tenn.
h.
Library Board. The Lib ary Board by ordinance requires a Mayoral
appointment with Coun '1 ratification. Currently, there appear to
be three positions that '11 eventually need to be filled, two of
which expired December 31,1997, and one position that should
expire December 31, 199 , that I do not believe has ever been filled.
At this time, I have not eceived any recommendations from
Librarian Marge Bauer n these appointments, and the Council
could either appoint indi . duals or recommend that the Library
Board advertise the ope ings and make a recommendation to the
Council at a future meet ng. Since two of the members may have
an interest in being reap ointed, I would simply suggest that the
Council wait for a recom endation from the Library Board before
appointing anyone.
1. Recyclinli:' Comm-ittee. C rently, Councilmember Bruce Thielen
has been the Council rep esentative on this committee.
J. . . The Economic Development
Authority is composed c rrently of seven members appointed by the
Mayor and confinned by the City Council. According to our
ordinance that establish d the EDA, two members of the committee
shall be members of the ity Council, and those two positions are
currently held by Counci members Roger Carlson and Clint Herbst.
As far as the non-Counci membership is concerned, the position
currently held by Darrin Lahr, who was appointed to replace Al
Larson who resigned, ex ired December 31, 1997. Mr. Lahr has
indicated a willingness t continue on the EDA if reappointed.
.
k.
. The Police
Advisory Commission is omposed of five members appointed by the
Mayor and confirmed by the City Council, one of which is a Council
member. For the past fe years, Councilmember Brian Stumpfhas
served in that capacity. urrently, there are two commission
33
.
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
members whose terms e pired December 31,1997, and those are
Bridget Baldwin and Da . d Gerads. Unless the Council is aware of
other individuals who m y be interested, I would recommend these
individuals be reappoin d for additional3-year terms.
1.
Parks Commlssion. Cur ently, the position held by Fran Fair
expired December 31, 1 97. This commission is also a 3-year term.
In addition to the norm 1 term that expired in 1997, there is
currently a vacancy in a position formerly held by Robbie Smith
that expires December 31,1999. Mr. Smith was recently appointed
to the Planning Commis ion, thus creating the new vacancy. The
Parks Commission has t ically interviewed applicants and made a
recommendation to the ouncil for approval. Other than the
reappointment of Fran air, it is recommended that the City
Council wait for a reco endation from the Parks Commission for
the vacancy expiring De ember 1999.
The following appointments are not r quired to be made annually by statute,
but each of them performs services 0 an as-needed basis for the City. The
consulting services and/or individual are listed as follows and can be
individually discussed by the Council if desired.
.
1. City Attorney. For the ast seven years, Mr. Paul Weingarden has
served as our official Cit Attorney. As you are aware, in addition
to Mr. Weingarden, the ity also utilizes the services of his
associates, Dennis Dale and/or Dave Usset, depending on the legal
issue involved. It is reco ended at this time that we simply
continue this arrangeme t utilizing Mr. Weingarden and his
associates for basic legal purposes of the City.
2. City Auditor. Historical y, Gruys, Borden, Carlson & Associates
has been the City's audi or. As they have become very familiar
with our accounting pra tices, I do not have any problem with the
City continuing our rela ionship with this firm as our official
auditor.
Consulting- Engineer. C rrently, the consulting engineering firm of
WSB & Associates and, in particular, Mr. Bret Weiss, has been
appointed as the City's 'mary City Engineer. For general
engineering services, it i recommended that we continue our
arrangement with Mr. B et Weiss as the City Engineer with the
firm ofWSB & Associates.
3.
.
34
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
.
4.
City Planner. For the p st number of years, Mr. Steve Grittman of
Northwest Associated C nsultants has been the City Planner. It is
recommended that our r lationship with Mr. Grittman and
Northwest Associated C nsultants continue on an as-needed basis.
In addition to the annual appointme ts, Mayor Fair has recommended
continuing with the appointments of ouncil members as liaison members with
various committees and commissions of the City. The Mayor and Council
members may want to discuss which ommissions or committees individual
Council members will be assigned to erve on as liaison members. The current
appointments to various City commit ees is summarized on the attached
supplement for review.
.
The attached sheet as supporting dat lists all of the members of the various
commissions and appropriate appoin ments, both required and discretionary,
that the Council can consider for 199 . The underlined names are the ones that
are in need of appointment for 1998; nd in some cases, it may have been
previously noted that a recommenda . on has not yet been made for filling a
vacancy, in which case the Council m y be asked to consider this appointment at
a future date. This will likely be the ase for the Library Board and Parks
Commission appointments.
If the Council is in agreement with a of the recommendations for annual
appointments, a single motion is all t at is needed to cover the vacancies
underlined, or individual appointme ts can be made separately as needed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
List of current appointments needed d current office holders.
.
35
1998 ANNUAL POINTMENTS
. Official Depositories: arquette Bank Monticello
F. rst Bank
FOrst National Bank of Monticello
C ief Financial Officer -
authorized to designate other
depositories for investment
purposes only.
Newspaper: onticello Times
Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. Bob Murray 12/2001
(5-year staggered terms) 2. Damn Lahr 12/2000
3. Brad Barger 12/99
4. Dan Frie 12/98
5. Steve Andrews 12/97
Planning Commission: 1. Richard Carlson
2. Robbie Smith
3. Dick Frie
4. Richard Martie
5. Rod Dragsten
. Health Officer: D . Donald Maus
(1 year)
Acting Mayor: C int Herbst
(1 year)
J oint Commissions:
Community Education B 11 Fair
Fire Board
OAA
Library Board: 1. 12/99
(3-year staggered) 2. Duff Davidson 12/97
3. Jeanette Lukowski 12/99
40 Ruby Bensen 12/97
5. Diane Herbst 12/98
Attorney:
Planner:
.
Auditor:
APPOINT.L1S: 1/8/98 11-1 Page 1
Recycling Committee: B ce Thielen
Economic Development Authority: 1. Roger Carlson, Council 12/2001
. (5-year staggered terms) 2. Clint Herbst, Council 12/98
3. Ken Maus* 12/2001
4. Damn Lahr 12/97 ;;2 0 D:.t..
5. Barb Schwientek 12/98
6. Bill Demeules 12/99
7. Ron Hoglund* 12/2000
Engineer:
Police Advisory Commission: 1. Brian Stumpf, Council 12/98
(3-yr staggered terms) 2. Bridget Baldwin 12/97 vA CA /I'r
3. David Gerads 12/97 ~ 1j'00
4. Brad Fyle 12/98
5. Liz DeMarais 12/99
Parks Commission: 1. Earl Smith 12/98
(3-yr staggered terms) 2. Larry N "Ian 12/99
3. Fran Fair 12/97
4. Rick Traver 12/98
5. 12/99
.
HRA:
Planning Commission:
Parks Commission:
Police Commission:
Fire Board:
Community Ed:
Library Board:
MCP:
.
APPOINT.L1S: 1/8/98
~:A 61
Roger Carlson",~~
Clint Herbst ))
Bruce Thielenii //
Brian Stumpf
Brian Stumpf
Bill Fair
Bruce Thielen
Brian Stumpf '~(~l(v~~ Q lJi 'V\('~/H,'. tM"-f ~JC;I- /;;e f~{s,iJ((
11--2-
Page 2
.
.
.
12.
(J.O.)
Council Agenda - 1/12/98
City Council is asked to revisit a topi and consider providing direction. As
you recall, some time ago the City Co ncil reviewed proposals by the
Monticello Times and Steve Andrews on development of a home page for the
City. The decision was tabled pendin completion of a request for proposal
process and pending insertion of the i em in the 1998 budget. After further
review at staff level, we request that ity Council again review the two
proposals, make a selection, and dire t staff accordingly. It is our view that
development of an RFP requires a si ificant staff effort and is not likely to
enhance our options. The item was p aced in the 1998 budget.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to select the Monticello imes or Steve Andrews as internet
home page service provider as utlined in their respective proposals.
2.
Motion to direct staff again to repare an RFP for said service.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City Administrator recommends hat the Council select the Monticello
Times as the internet home page se ce provider. The Monticello Times is
recommended because of information ransfer efficiency, track record, and
the cost is reasonable. Almost all of t e information that we distribute to the
public is via the Monticello Times as ur official newspaper. It would appear
to be sensible and efficient to extend t is relationship to include home page
development assistance. The Times h s recently been assigned internet
home page provider for the School District and Wright County and continues
to develop as the "hub" for communit information. Integration of City
information with community informa ion will be enhanced if the Monticello
Times option is selected.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Proposals from the Mtmticell. Times nd Steve Andrews.
36
ES & SHOPPER
116 E. River 81. · Monticello, MN 5536 · 612-295-3131 · FAX 612-295-3080
E-mail: montimes@means.net · W bsite: http://www.montitimes.com
.
City of Monticello ebsite Proposal
A complete Monticello City online website offer endless possibilities and benefits. The site we've
been developing is designed to serve the community in a number of ways. A city website will provide
information and a means of communication betwee current, past and potential city residents, snow-
birds, city businesses, businesses interested in locati g to this area, and the city staff.
It is a resource center with information about th city, including city departments, meetings and
agendas, calendar of events, special projects, city an ouncements, maps, industrial development,
Chamber of Commerce, Monticello Community Par ners and some historical background as well.
Investment by the city into this web site will mo e Monticello to a new technological level, putting
the power of the internet to work for this communit . Here's a breakdown:
Website Development ($3500)
· Design to date, $1750, to be billed Nov. 1, 199
· Further development of site (approximately 40 50 hours), $1750, to be billed Jan. 1
.
Monthly Fees ($350)
This monthly fee would include:
· Regular updates of the city site for one year ( ith up to four hours of design/development time
per month)
· Administration/maintenance of the city site for one year (including regularly backups of the city
site)
· Up to 25 megs of space on our web server (cur ent site is approximately 7 megs)
· Registration of the Monticello City domain na e with top search engines
· Link-in the form of a banner ad-to the Montie 110 city site from a Monticello, MN site
· Link (banner ad) from the Monticello Times si e
· Link from the Yellow Pages site
· Linking privileges for businesses/industries wit in the city site to other sites hosted by the
Monticello Times
· Business and city staff E-mail links from withi the city site
· One chat or forum option on the city site
,. Up to five e-mail addresses
We would have the City of Monticello up by Nov. 1, 997 (though some portions of the site may be under
construction for a month or so). Total investment by the ity for one year would be $7,700.
. This is a great opportunity for the City of Monticello 0 get online with an informative, useful site that can be
accessed 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year. Internet vis bility gives Monticello great marketing opportunities
along extensive communication options for the city staff, ity council and residents of Monticello.
I'L .., I
.
.
.
Jeff O'Neil
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Jeff,
10/09/97
I understand that the City will be having an Inte et Web site developed. I am interested
in developing such a site and have prepared the following proposal for review by you,
Rick W olfsteller and the City Council.
For $6000.00 we will develop a Web site for th city of Monticello and deploy it for
twelve months on the Internet. Included in the e are the following items:
.:. 20 Megabytes of data storage capacity on an advanced capability server
.:. Domain transfer services
.:. 1000 mb of data transfer per month
.:. Web server connected via TI connections, 0 e hop from the MCI Backbone
.:. Detailed, real-time Web usage statistics
.:. COI support
.:. Java@, Java Script@, Shockwave@ support
We will point up to 50 e-mail addresses to app opriate existing accounts from the Web
site for city staff, commissions, Council and an one designated by staff as an e-mail
recipient.
Sixty (60) hours of development time is provid d to initially set up the site. This includes
meetings with city staff as necessary to determ ne content and policies regarding the site.
After the initial sixty hours, an additional two ( ) hours per week is included to keep
information current. Beyond this, any addition I time required is billed at rate of $28.50
per hour. Free estimates are provided for any s ecial projects requiring additional time.
It is our belief that original material produced y us and paid for by the City of
Monticello belongs in the public domain, prov' ded that is the wish of City Administration
and the Council. In other words, we relinquish any rights to original material that we
produce on the site to the City of Monticello.
I 't ... '2---
.
.
.
We will not restrict access to nor attempt to res rict "linking" to the Monticello Web site.
Instead, we will actively promote and encourag the use of the site and encourage people
to link to it.
Some of the basic items we will build into the s te inelude:
.:. Council members directory; City directories; Composition and an overview of various
boards and commissions (EDA, IDC, Parks Co mission, HRA, Planning Commission
the Library Board, Police Commission etc.)
.:. Advanced community and economic demog aphics including data from Minnesota
Department of Trade and Economic Developm nt
.:. A community calendar plays important part . n keeping the community connected.
We'll give you a very good calendar, one that p ople will actually use!
.:. School, church, parks and recreation inform tion, as well as community organization
lists will be available on the site.
.:. We are able to provide digital photographs ti r the Web site as well.
Additional items to consider adding to the site i elude:
.:. City meeting agendas, meeting minutes and asic city documents that can be
downloaded from the city site.
.:. Updates from City Hall on various issues an topics.
.:. Statutes could be placed on the site as well. or example, people would be able to look
up the snowmobile ordinance on the Web site. here could even be a link to a map
showing the proper route to pass through town n a snowmobile.
I'm sure you have ideas on information you wo ld like to see posted as well.
I look forward to working with you and city st f on this exciting project. Our rates are
very competitive and we will deliver the conte t to make this a useful and valuable site
for residents, potential residents and the busine s community alike!
;er'IY' ~~
Steve An rews
Cloud Co munications, Inc.
1005 East River St
Monticell ,MN 55362
12.--3
F'
8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
01/08/98 1S:11 :S1
Schedule of 8ills
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GLOSOS-V04.30 COVERPAGE
GL540R
.
Report Selection:
RUN GROUP... 0108
COMMENT. . . 1/0 CKS
DATA-JE-ID DATA COMMENT
0-01081998-298 1/08 CKS
Run Instructions:
Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hol Space LPI Lines CPI
J 01 SCEO Y S 6 066 10
.
.
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
01/08/98 15: 11 :59 Schedule 0 Bills GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 1
eNDOR NAME AMOUNT
. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE pot F/P 10 LINE
AG REPAIR
*FY* PARKS-POINT ARMS 148.38 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PAR S 101.45201.2210 298 00035
AMERICAN PAGING OF MINNE
JOHN & RICH 18.38 TELEPHONE 601.49440.3210 PAGERS 298 00020
MATT 27.24 TELEPHONE 602.49490.3210 PAGERS 298 00021
PATTY 10.81 TELEPHONE 101.42701.3210 PAGERS 298 00022
GARY A 9.19 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 PAGERS 298 00023
ROGER 9.19 TELEPHONE 101.43120.3210 PAGERS 298 00024
JOHN S 9.19 TELEPHONE 101.43110.3210 PAGERS 298 00025
JOHN L 9.19 TELEPHONE 101.45201.3210 PAGERS 298 00026
TOM B 9.19 TELEPHONE 101.43115.3210 PAGERS 298 00027
102.38 *VENDOR TOTAL
ANNAN DALE FIRE DEPT
FIRE-1998 ASSOC FEES 15.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU BSC 101.42201.4330 298 00001
BRAY/MARY
*FY* OCT NOV DEC 450.00 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 651.49010.3199 298 00036
CEDAR ST. GARDEN CENTER
*FY* CHRISTMAS TREE 65.33 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.41940.4399 CH 298 00037
~RRIGAN CONSTRUCTION IN
*FY* FINAL CARPENTRY 5,655.00 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 AN SHELTER 298 00038
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING
*FY* 3,343.40 BEER 609.49750.2520 BEER 298 00039
*FY* 173.05 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 NON ALCOHOLIC 298 00040
3,516.45 *VENDOR TOTAL
DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
*FY* 1,378.15 BEER 609.49750.2520 BEER 298 00041
FEDERAL EXPRESS
*FY* FREIGHT 27. 00 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.41910.4399 PLANNING 298 00042
GARTNER'S OFFICE PRODUCT
*FY* OFFICE SUPPLIES 723.96 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 101.41301.2099 CH 298 00044
*FY* OFFICE SUPPLIES 124.15 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 101.41990.2099 DEP REG 298 00043
848.11 *VENDOR TOTAL
GRIGGS, COOPER & COMPANY
*FY* 25.00 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 FREIGHT 298 00045
*FY* 2,965.11 LI QUOR 609.49750.2510 LIQUOR 298 00046
*FY* 39.71 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 MISC TAXABLE 298 00048
*FY* 906.55 WINE 609.49750.2530 WINE 298 00047
3,936.37 *VENDOR TOTAL
~
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
01/08/98 15: 11 :59 Schedule 0 Bi 11 5 GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 2
.NDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P 10 LINE
GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE INC.
*FY* 9,156.20 BEER 609.49750.2520 BEER 298 00049
*FY* 52.05 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 MISC TAXABLE 298 00050
9,208.25 *VENDOR TOTAL
HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT
*FY* WATER-T/POTABLE 12.00 MISC PROFESSIONAL SE VIC 601.49440.3199 298 00051
*FY* WATER-CHEMICALS 336.71 CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 601.49440.2160 298 00052
*FY* SEWER-CHEMICALS 725.28 CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 602.49490.2160 298 00053
1.074.05 *VENDOR TOTAL
HERMES/GERALD T
LIBRARY CLEANING 227.50 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 211.45501.3110 1/1 TO 1/15 298 00002
J M OIL COMPANY
*FY* FIRE-MOTOR FUEL 35.17 MOTOR FUELS 101.42201.2120 298 00054
KEN ANDERSON TRUCKING
*FY* (8)ANIMALS 42.60 MISC PROFESSIONAL SE VIC 101.42701.3199 298 00055
KENNEDY & GRAVEN
*FY* HRA-GENERAL 134.00 PROF SRV - LEGAL FEE 213.46301.3040 298 00056
~*FY* HRA-TIF-1-22 394.80 PROF SRV - LEGAL FEE 213.46522.3040 298 00057
528.80 *VENDOR TOTAL
MINNEGASCO
*FY* LIQUOR STORE 148.60 GAS 609.49754.3830 298 00058
MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
*FY* CONNECTION FEE 2,691.00 WATER SERVICE CONNEC ION 601.49440.4375 4TH QTR 97 298 00059
MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
LIQUOR-BUYER CARD 20.00 LICENSES & PERMITS 609.49754.4370 298 00004
MN DEPUTY REGISTRAR'S AS
DEP REG-1998 DUES 290.00 DUES. MEMBERSHIP & S BSC 101.41990.4330 298 00003
MN STATE FIRE DEPARTMENT
F I RE-MN FEES 120.00 DUES. MEMBERSHIP & S BSC 101.42201.4330 298 00005
MN STATE TREASURER
*FY* SURCHARGE 2,429.65 BUILDING PERMITS 101.32211 4TH QTR 97 298 00061
MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF CO
CHAMBER MEMBERSHIP 385.00 DUES. MEMBERSHIP & S BSC 101.41301.4330 298 00008
MONTICELLO DEPUTY REG #0
FIRE-82 FORD 13.50 LICENSES & PERMITS 101.42201.4370 298 00028
~PW INSP-97 FORO 13.50 LICENSES & PERMITS 101.43115.4370 298 00029
BLDG INSP-88 & 97 DODGE 27.00 LICENSES & PERMITS 101.42401.4370 298 00030
WATER-(4) VEHICLES 54.00 LICENSES & PERMITS 601.49440.4370 298 00031
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
01/08/98 15: 11: 59 Schedule of Bills GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 3
.ENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
MONTICELLO DEPUTY REG 110
WWTP-84 DODGE & 31 INTL 27.00 ~ICENSES & PERMITS 436.49201.4370 298 00032
STREETS-(17) VEHICLES 229.50 LICENSES & PERMITS 101.43120.4370 298 00033
364.50 *VENDOR TOTAL
MONTICELLO SENIOR CITIZE
CONTRACT 2,833.33 SENIOR CENTER CONTRIB TI 101.45175.3136 FEBRUARY 298 00009
NASASP
MEMBERSHIP DUES 25.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.43110.4330 298 00034
NATIONAL AUTOMOBILE DEAL
*FY* OLD CAR APPR 60.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.41990.4330 DEP REG 298 00062
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
SEwER 987.31 ELECTRIC 602.49490.3810 298 00017
STREET LIGHTS 4.783.99 ELECTRIC 101.43160.3810 298 00018
5,771.30 *VENDOR TOTAL
NORWEST BANK MINNESOTA,
*FY* MN GO IMP 11/1/77 200.00 FISCAL AGENTS' FEES 314.47001.6201 REGISTRAR FEES 298 00063
*FY* MN GO IMPT A 6/1/95 62.50 FISCAL AGENTS' FEES 314.47001.6201 REGISTRAR FEES 298 00064
. 262.50 *VENDOR TOTAL
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
*FY* 32.25 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 FREIGHT 298 00065
*FY* 2,196.85 WINE 609.49750.2530 WINE 298 00066
2,229.10 *VENDOR TOTAL
ROSEVILLE/CITY OF
*FY* MEMBERSHIP-CATHY 30.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU BSC 101.41520.4330 298 00060
SALZWEDEL/PATRICIA
AN SHELTER-TRAVEL EXP 52.08 TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.42701.3310 298 00006
AN SHELTER-SUPPLIES 192.85 CLEANING SUPPLIES 101.42701.2110 298 00007
AN SHELTER-FACEPLATES 288.00 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 298 00019
532.93 *VENDOR TOTAL
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT SUP
*FY* 59.10 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI ES 609.49754.2199 MISC OP SPLYS 298 00068
*FY* 36.75 Mise TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 Mise TAXABLE 298 00067
95.85 *VENDOR TOTAL
TDS TELECOM
LIQUOR- TELEPHONE 137.04 TELEPHONE 609.49754.3210 298 00015
LIBRARYrTELEPHONE 87.21 TELEPHONE 211.45501.3210 298 00016
224.25 *VENDOR TOTAL
~RPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
*FY* 13,467.25 BEER 609.49750.2520 BEER 298 00069
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
01/08/98 15: 11: 59 Schedule 0 Bi 11 s GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 4
.NDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P ID LINE
U S POSTAL SERVICE
*FY* DAMAGE CLAIM 313.81 MISC PROFESSIONAL SE VIC 101.43120.3199 SNOW PLOY 298 00070
VIKING COCA COLA
*FY* 189.50 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 LIQUOR-POP 298 00071
WATSON COMPANY, INC/THE
*FY* TAX MISe 258.84 MIse TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 506489 298 00072
WOLFS TELLER/R I CHARD
*FY* RICK-CONFERENCES 167.68 CONFERENCE & SCHOOLS 101. 41301. 3320 298 00073
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR-TR
SHERIFF PATROL 27,776.40 PROF SRV - LAW ENFOR EME 101.42101.3050 JANUARY 298 00010
WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECURITY
FIRE-MONITORING 55.91 MAINTENANCE AGREEMEN S 101.42201.3190 298 00012
DEP REG-MONITORING 19.12 MAINTENANCE AGREEMEN S 101.41990.3190 298 00013
PARKS-MONITORING 15.98 MAINTENANCE AGREEMEN S 101.45201.3190 298 00014
91. 01 *VENDOR TOTAL
WRIGHT WAY SHOPPER
~*FY* ADVERTISING 219.95 ADVERTISING 609.49754.3499 LIQUOR 298 00074
WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP ELE
STREET LIGHTS 8.00 ELECTRIC 101.43160.3810 298 00011
~
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
01/08/98 15:11:59
eENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION
REPORT TOTALS:
.
.
AMOUNT
88,263.99
ACCOUNT NAME
RECORDS PRINTED - 000074
Schedule 0 Bills
FUND & ACCOUNT
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 5
CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P 10 LINE
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
01/08/98 15:12:43
.
FUND RECAP:
Schedule of Bills
FUND DESCRIPTION
101 GENERAL FUND
211 LIBRARY FUND
213 HRA FUND
314 1977-1,-2,-3 G.O.BOND FUND
436 93-14C WWTP EXPANSION PRJ
601 WATER FUND
602 SEWER FUND
609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND
651 RIVERSIDE CEMETERY
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
BANK RECAP:
BANK NAME
4111tNL GENERAL CHECKING
LIQR LIQUOR CHECKING
TOTAL ALL BANKS
01 BURSEMENTS
47,023.65
314.71
528.80
262.50
27.00
3,112.15
1,739.83
34,805.35
450.00
88,263.99
01 BURSEMENTS
53,458.64
34,805.35
88,263.99
THE PRECEDING LIST OF BILLS PAYABLE WAS EVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.
DATE .. .. .. .. . . ..
APPROVED BY
.
-------
..... ......... ......... .... .."".....
t...........1o. ......... ............ t
.... ... .......... .... ....... ...........
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL060S-V04.30 RECAPPAGE
GL540R
Erooo En IOBS'lozsr'9Er IN3Wdln03 ~3HIO OO'IZ 93~ ~31IV~1 )lNVl
zrooo En SZOE'lozsnEr NOI 3n~1SN03 - ^~S dO~d ES'SEB'Z XV1 3SDX3
au 93~ Alnd30 0113311NOW
.00 En SSO'OISWIOI 3SN3dX3 ~3HIO 3SIW 00'051 9NIMv~a A3^~nS
03 dO ~38WVH3 01133l1NOW
1V101 ~OaN3^* OO'SEO'S
L rooo En IIBOZ'IOI 318VAVd ~Na OO'BOI 93~ M V
S\7OOO En IIBonOl 318VAVd ~NO 00 'ISl ' I 93~ 31l80WMONS
srooo En llBonOI 318VAVd ~NO 00'15 93~ IdV~3~31VM
LEOOO En llBonOl 318VAVd ~NO OO'OE WHO
SEOOO E.n llBonOl 318VAVd ~NO OO'S 93~ M V
SEOOO ESZ IIBOZ'IOI 318VAVd ~NO OO'SEE 93~ 311BOWMONS
1EOOO En IIBonOI 31BVAVd ~NO oO'rz 93~ IdV~3~31VM
EEOOO ESZ llBOZ'lOI 318VAVd ~NQ OO'ZS 311U Hv~3~31VM
51000 En llBOZ'lOI 318VAVd ~NO OO'OE WHO
\71000 En llBOZ'lOI 318VAVd ~NQ OO'S 9V/l~d
€I 000 En IIBonOl 31BVAVd ~NQ 00' rB 93~ M V
ZIOOO En llBonOl 31BVAVd ~NO 00' ur' I 93~ 31I80WMONS
11000 En llBOZ'lOI 318VAVd ~NQ OO'OV 31111 IdV~3~31VM
SOOOO En llBonOl 31BVAVd ~Na OO'SES'1 93~ 31180WMONS
S3~ 1v~n1VN dO 1~Vd30 NW
SIOOO En SSIE'IOZ6v'SE\7 3I^~3 1VNOISS3dO~d 3SIW SI 'E66 'I )1338 13VH3IW-IN3W3SV3
)1338 V33383~ ~ 13VH3lW
1V101 ~OaN3^* n'B69'OlS
OvOOO En BSE\1'OZSlv'IOI S39~VH3 )INVB 00'51 39~VH3 3~lM
10 En 10\701 'SS6 SlN3W1S3^Nl 00'000'5 A3N~VB HllWS
o ESZ 86E\1'OmnOl S39~VH3 )INV8 00'51 39~VH3 3~lM
" Uoo En lorOl'SS6 SlN3W1S3^Nl n'BSS'SOs 3~IM-A3N~V8 HIlWS
i133l1NOW )INV8 3113no~vw
ZOOOO ISZ 10\7r'IOSZv'101 SN3dX 39VWVO W~OlS L661 OO'OOS'E EOSOS' ~d ~OON3^ 39NVH3
3^VO/0~VNNl)l
50000 E9Z OESE'IOZW 101 33NV~nSNl 313IH3^ Ll '6ZL 33Nv~nSNI-3~Id
v NOS1~V3-N3ZNV~d-~31S0d
SEOOO ESZ 01 \7Z'O\7v6v'109 1N3W ln03 ~ S1001 11VWS l6'Lv 1001 llVWS-~31VM
W~Vd 13Tld
SIOOO ESZ SSIE'IOZ6\7'SE\7 3I^~3 lVNOISS3dO~d ::JSIW IS' HE' \7 S~311VM-IN3W3SV3
S~311VM ~ S31~VH::l
90000 En sZOE'IOZ6\7'SEr NOll n~lSN03 - ^~S dO~d SZ'6SZ'91\7' I S# lS3n03~ IN3WAVd
::lNl 'NOS~313d ~ NOSdlOOV
01000 ESZ 10ZS'lOLW 101 S9NlO11n8 IS'6L ~3N1SVd 31V9-H3113HS NV
1108 ~ InN swvov
3Nl1 QI did #Od 3::ll0^NI WlV1::J INnO::l3V ~ ONn:! 3WVN INn03::JV INnowv NOlldl~JS3C
3WVN HOON3^
~ 39Vd OE'rO^-~0\7S19 sll~8 JO lnpey:JS LZ:SS:El S6/S0/10
::JllNOW dO All::J W3ISAS 1VI3NVNlj ::J~8
_____--L____
C10vSl8
38~dCl3^08 OS.vO^-SOSOl8
Oll30IiNOW ~O AiI8
.
.
o l 990 9 S ^ lOr
Id:J sau~ 1 Idl 60eds PL OH J6~U~Jd WJO;j s6~do:J J6UUea bqor
:suo~~onJ4sul un~
S~8 lvnNVW 830 S~~-L66LLS~L-W
:;:t C100N3^ OCl'VNNI>l L'9~-L66LVZLO-W
iN3WW08 'ViVO OI-3r-Vi'V'0
S>l8 lvnNVW C138W3830 ...lN3WW00
WLS~LO ooodnOCl8 NnCl
;uo~~~eLeS 4~odeCl
SLL~8 JO eLnpey~s
lZ;SS:SL 86/90~~
W31SAS lVI0NVNld ~
t: ~
B~NANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
o /98 13:55:27 Schedu 1 e of B ; ls GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 2
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll F/P 10 LINE
MONTICELLO DEPUTY REG #e
2,856.63 *VENDOR TOTAL
NORTHWEST MINNESOTA CHAP
MEETING REGISTRATION 10.00 CONFERENCE & SCHOOLS 101.42401.3320 GARY 263 00007
1998 MEMBERSHIP DUES 20.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SUBS C 101.42401.4330 GARY 263 00008
30.00 *VENDOR TOTAL
O'NEILL/JEFF
RE:MB PHONE CALL VOID 2UOCR TELEPHONE 101.41910.3210 263 00021
PARKS-REIMB TELE VOID 85.33CR CONFERENCE & SCHOOLS 101.45201.3320 263 00022
REIMB ZIP DRIVE & VIDEO 308.82CR MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.41920.4399 263 00023
BRIDGEVIEW-PICTURES VOID 22.78CR MISC PROFESSIONAL SERVI 101.41910.3199 263 00024
TRAVEL EXPENSE-VOID 141. 92CR TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.41910.3310 263 00025
REIMB FROM JEFF VOID 67.97 TELEPHONE 101.41910.3210 263 00026
REIMB FROM JEFF TO CITY 67.97CR TELEPHONE 101.41910.3210 263 00027
JEFF-REIMB CELL PHONE 21.30 TELEPHONE 101.41910.3210 263 00028
PARKS-TELE REIMB 85.33 CONFERENCE & SCHOOLS 101.45201.3320 263 00029
JEFF-ZIP DRIVE & VIDEO 259.74 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.41920.099 263 00030
JEFF-BRIDGEVIEW PICTURES 22.78 MISC PROFESSIONAL SERVI 101.41910.3199 263 00031
4111f-TRAVEL EXPENSE 141.92 TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.41910.3310 263 00032
49.08CR *VENDOR TOTAL
PIONEER RESEARCH CORPORA
WRONG VENDOR 1I-VOID 228.86CR MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 101.43127.2199 263 00001
WRONG VENDOR #-VOIO 32.87CR MISC NON TAXABLE 609.49750.2550 263 00003
261.73CR *VENDOR TOTAL
ROBERT & ANITA GRIEMAN
EASEMENT-ROBERT GRIEMAN 3,462.18 MISC PROFESSIONAL SERVI 439.49201.3199 263 00020
SUPERIOR SERVICES-CENTRA
GARBAGE-AUGUST 8,883.70 PROF SRV - REFUSE COLLE 101.43230.3100 263 00050
JULY RECYCLING 8,883.70CR PROF SRV - RECYCLING CO 101.43230.3101 S/B GARBAGE 263 00049
0.00 *VENDOR TOTAL
U.S. POSTMASTER
PW- (2) ROLLS STAMPS 64.00 POST AGE 101.43110.3220 263 00044
W DAVID KINNARD
CHANGE VENDOR 11 TO 1264 3,500.00CR 1997 STORM DAMAGE EXPEN 101.42501.4401 261 00001
WRIGHT TITLE GUARANTEE C
LAND PURCHASE 48,882.14 LAND 265.49201.5101 263 00048
~EDICAL SERVICE
P-OP SUPPLIES 228.86 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 101.43127.2199 263 00002
UQUOR-SUPPLl ES 32 .87 MISC NON TAXABLE 609.49750.2550 54127662 263 00004
261.73 *VENDOR TOTAL
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
01/06/98 13;55:27
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION
REPORT TOTALS:
AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME
1,994,653.04
RECORDS PRINTED - 000052
Schedule of Bills
FUND & ACCOUNT
CLAIM INVOICE
CITY OF MONTI~
GL540R-V04.30 PAGE ~
PO~ F/P 10 LINE
.
.
~INANCIAL SYSTEM
01/06/98 13:55:48
FUND RECAP:
FUND DESCRIPTION
101 GENERAL FUND
265 WATER ACCESS FUND
436 93-14C WWTP EXPANSION PRJ
439 93-12C M.O. TRUNK STM SEWER
501 WATER FUND
609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND
955 INVESTMENT HOLDING FUND
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
BANK RECAP:
BANK NAME
~ ------------------------~---
GENL GENERAL CHECKING
LIQR LIQUOR CHECKING
TOTAL ALL SANKS
Schedule of Sills
DISBU SEMENTS
6 068.90
48 882.14
1,419 155.88
9 829.95
41.91
510 668.26
1 ,994,653.04
DISBURSEMENTS
1,994,653.04
1,994,653.04
THE PRECEDING LIST OF BILLS PAYABLE WAS RE IEWED AND APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.
DATE ............
APPROVED BY
.
.. ............."'....................
.. ........................ ...........
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL060S-V04.30 RECAPPAGE
GL540R
F,*
eRc FINANCIAL SYSTEM
4It2/31/97 12:38:24
Schedule of 8ills
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL050S-V04.30 COVERPAGE
GL540R
Report Selection:
RUN GROUP... D1231
COMMENT. . . 12/ 1 CKS
DATA-JE-ID DATA COMMENT
D-12311997-287 12/31 CKS
Run Instructions:
Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hol Space LPI Lines CPI
J 01 SeED Y S 6 066 10
.
.
eRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
.131/97 12:38:30 Schedule of Bills GL540R~V04.30 PAGE 1
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# FIP 10 LINE
A T & T WIRELESS SERVICE
RICK~CELLULAR 12.15 TELEPHONE 101.41301.3210 287 00001
JEFF-CELLULAR 45.72 TELEPHONE 101.41910.3210 287 00002
GARY".'CELLULAR 25.52 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 287 00003
83.49 *VENDOR TOTAL
ADAMS NUT & BOLT CO
AN SHELTER-ANCHOR 410.40 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 1434329-01 287 00004
ADOLFSON & PETERSON, INC
PAYMENT REQUEST 9 899,395.47 PROF SRV - CONSTRUCT I N 435.49201.3025 287 00131
ARAMARK
CITY HALL-SUPPLIES 140.95 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI S 101.41940.2199 5013~802712 287 00005
ASHWILL CERAMIC TILE
AN SHELTER-ANIMAL RUNS 1,555.00 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 287 00005
BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA COM
MISC TAXABLE 884.85 MISC TAXABLE 509.49750.2540 287 00015
~UN INTERTEC CORPORATI
WTP~MATL TESTING 792.75 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 435.49201.3199 287 00007
KLEIN 4TH 725.75 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 458.49201.3199 237 00008
1,518.50 *VENDOR TOTAL
CATHODIC PROTECTION SERV
WATER-CATHODIC PROTECT 325.00 REPAIR & MTC - OTHER 501.49440.4099 84S08820 287 00009
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST CLOU
TOM-CELLULAR 81. 30 TELEPHONE 101.43115.3210 287 00010
FIRE DEPT~CELLULAR 1.05 TELEPHONE 101.42201.3210 287 00011
GARY~CELLULAR 5.45 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 287 00012
MA H-CELLULAR 11.21 TELEPHONE 501.49440.3210 287 00013
100.03 *VENDOR TOTAL
CENTURY LABS
WA TER-SUPPLI ES 98.09 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI S 101.43127.2199 327 287 00014
CITY BUSINESS
OLLI E-.SUBSCRI PTION 59.00 DUES. MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.45501.4330 287 00017
CONSOLIDATED COMM DIRECT
LIQUOR-ADVERTISING 42.50 ADVERTISING 509.49754.3499 BIG LAKE 287 00018
COUNTRY LUMBER
4!Ilf SHELTER-THRESHOLD 85.39 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 208742 287 00015
RYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT
SNOW & ICE~PLOW 3,557.75 HEAVY MACHINERY 101.43125.5401 53181 287 00019
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
.31/91 12:38:30 Schedule of Bi 11 s GL540R~V04.30 PAGE 2
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# FIP 10 LINE
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING
BEER 6.501.11 BEER 609.49750.2520 287 00020
NON ALCOHOLIC 101.00 MISC TAXABLE 609.49150.2540 287 00021
6.614.11 *VENDOR TOTAL
DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY
WINE 540.30 WINE 609.49150.2530 23233 281 00022
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASS
EC DEV-DUES 160.00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.46501.4330 287 00023
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAIN
F I RE-REPAI R 454.65 REPAIR & MTC - VEHICL 5 101.42201.4050 12071. 16, 18 287 00024
EMERGITEK CORPORATION
FI RE-REPAI R 31.54 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PART 101.42201.2210 2469 287 00025
ENNIS CABINETS
LIBRARY-(2) BOOKCASES 1. 700.00 FURNITURE & FIXTURES 211.45501.5601 1481 281 00027
COUNCIL..CABINET 519.00 FURNITURE & FIXTURES 101.41110.5601 1510 281 00026
2,219.00 *VENDOR TOTAL
4111tTER-FRANZEN-CARLSON A
FIRE-GEN INSURANCE 50.00 MISC GENERAL INSURANC 101.42201.3699 2917 281 00028
GENERAL RENTAL CENTER
WATER-MATL HANDLING 16.06 UTILITY SYSTEM MTCE S PP 601.49440.2210 602860 287 00030
GLUNZ/RAYMOND J
ROWLAND..GRA VE OPEN I NG 355.00 PROF SRV .. EXCAVATION 651.49010.3115 281 00029
GOULD BROS. CHEV'-OLDS. C
FIRE~REPAIR 44.06 REPAIR & MTC -. VEHICL S 101.42201.4050 15439CTCS43131 287 00031
GRIGGS, COOPER & COMPANY
FREIGHT 129.00 FREIGHT 609.49150.3330 281 00032
LIQUOR 6,333.45 LIQUOR 609.49150.2510 281 00033
WINE 1,301.61 WINE 609.49150.2530 281 00034
MISC TAXABLE 84.73 MISC TAXABLE 609.49150.2540 281 00035
1,854.85 *VENDOR TOTAL
GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE INC.
BEER 4.688.73 BEER 609.49150.2520 281 00036
MISC TAXABLE 144.00 BEER 609.49750.2520 281 00031
4.832.13 *VENDOR TOTAL
4IIIIKINS WATER TREATMENT
A TER-' T IPOT ABLE 48.00 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 601.49440.3199 . 287 00038
8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
./31/97 12:38:30 Schedule of 8; 11 s GL540R-Y04.30 PAGE 3
YENOOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INYOICE PO# F/P ID LINE
HERMES/GERALD T
LIBRARY CLEANING 227.50 PROF SRY - CUSTODIAL 211.45501.3110 12/16 TO 12/31 287 00039
HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFICE
FIRE-MOTOR FUEL 34.73 MOTOR FUELS 101.42201.2120 287 00040
HOST/GARY
FIRE-SMOKE EATER 144.00 SMALL TOOLS & EQUIPME T 101.42201.2410 287 00041
FIRE-STAMPS 64.00 POSTAGE 101.42201.3220 287 00042
STORM-POP 105.44 1997 STORM DAMAGE EXP NS 101.42501.4401 287 00043
FIRE-1ST RESPONDER 135.36 CONFERENCE & SCHOOLS 101.42201.3320 287 00044
FIRE-CANOY-4TH OF JULY 143.15 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.42201.4399 287 00045
FIRE.SUPPLIES 60.93 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 101.42201.2199 287 00046
652.88 *YENDOR TOTAL
IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS
LIBRARY-COPIER 3,589.05 OFFICE EQUIPMENT 211.45501.5701 287 00047
LIBRARY'-COP IER M/A 44.00 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 211.45501.3190 DECEMBER 287 00049
LIBRARY-COPIER M/A 44.00 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 211.45501.3190 NOYEMBER 287 00048
3,677.05 *YENDOR TOTAL
.RATECH
ATER-RADIODETECTION KIT 2,982.00 OTHER EQUIPMENT 601.49440.5801 287 00050
JME OF MONTICELLO
AN SHELTER-REFUSE 272.00 8UILDINGS 101.42701.5201 5206 287 00051
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE L
FREIGHT 33.73 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 287 00052
LIQUOR 495.42 LIQUOR 609.49750.2510 281 00053
WINE 1, 207 .35 WINE 609.49750.2530 287 00054
1, 136.50 *YENDOR TOTAL
K MART STORE
FIRE-OP SUPPLIES 34.10 MISC REPAIR & MTC SUP LI 101.42201.2299 287 00056
KLEIN 4TH-FILM PROC 6.38 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 458.49201.3199 287 00057
40.48 *YENDOR TOTAL
KEITH KJELLBERG'S
RENTAL PROP-REPAIR 80.50 RENTAL HOUSE EXPENSES 240.49201.4381 9454 287 00058
KLM ENGINEERING INC
WWTP-PAINT INSP 2,457.50 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 436.49201.3199 312 287 00055
KRAM8ER & ASSOCIATES INC
ASSESSING SERVICES 1, 738.39 PROF SRY - ASSESSING 101.41550.3125 DECEMBER 287 00059
4IIIlQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC.
PARKS-SANDER 4,194.20 PATHWAY MTC/CONTRACTE S 101.45201.3197 P1980015 287 00060
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
./31/97 12:38:30 Schedule of ills GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 4
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE POll FIP 10 LINE
MONTICELLO AGENCY, INC.
ADM-'GEN BOND INSURANCE 50.00 MISC GENERAL INSURANC E B 101.41301.3699 287 00062
MONTICELLO PUBLIC LIBRAR
LIBRARY-PROF SERV-PROGS 2,135.00 PROF SRV - LIBRARY PR o R 211.45501.3015 287 00065
LIBRARY-OP SUPPLIES 337.87 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI S 211.45501.2199 287 00066
LIBRARY..BOOKS & PAMPLETS 295.17 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS 211.45501.4350 287 00067
LIBRARY-POSTAGE 38.40 POSTAGE 211.45501.3220 287 00068
LIBRARY-OTHER CHARGES 2,115.30CR OTHER CHARGES FOR SER IC 211.34999 287 00069
691.14 *VENDOR TOTAL
NORTHERN STATES POWER CO
WATER 2,662.34 ELECTRIC 601.49440.3810 287 00070
SEWER COLLECTION 351. 58 ELECTRIC 602.49490.3810 287 00071
STREET LIGHTS 747.79 ELECTRIC 101.43160.3810 287 00072
DEP REG 64.21 ELECTRIC 101.41990.3810 287 00073
PARKS 720.32 ELECTRIC 101.45201.3810 287 00074
CIVIL DEFENSE 14 .27 ELECTRIC 101.42501.3810 287 00075
SHOP/GARAGE 634.53 ELECTRIC 101.43127.3810 287 00076
FIRE DEPT 290.78 ELECTRIC 101.42201.3810 287 00077
CITY HALL 624.15 ELECTRIC 101.41940.3810 287 00078
~ARKING LOTS 128.65 ELECTRIC 101.43140.3810 287 00079
IQUOR 880.78 ELECTRIC 609.49754.3810 287 00080
LIBRARY 1,007.80 ELECTRIC 211.45501.3810 287 00081
8,127.20 *VENDOR TOTAL
OBERG MFG & FENCING
STORM-WWWTP'-REPAI RS 2,490.00 1997 STORM DAMAGE EXP NS 101.42501.4401 2431 287 00082
OLSON, USSET & WEINGARDE
LEGAL 227 . 25 PROF SRV - LEGAL FEES 101.41601.3040 287 00083
PAUSTIS & SONS
WINE 587.40 WINE 609.49750.2530 287 00084
FREIGHT 8.30 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 287 00085
595.70 *VENDOR TOTAL
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
FREIGHT 62.69 FREIGHT 609.49750.3330 287 00086
LIQUOR 2,416.58 LIQUOR 609.49750.2510 287 00087
WINE 1, 797 . 53 WINE 609.49750.2530 287 00088
4,276.80 *VENDOR TOTAL
PIONEER TRANSPORTATION,
LIQUOR-ADVERTISING 25.00 ADVERTISING 609.49754.3499 287 00089
.MBERY ITHE
~H-MEN'S RR REPAIR 57.00 REPAIR & MTC - BUILD N GS 101.41940.4010 13760 287 00093
MAINT-REPAIR 199.72 REPAIR & MTC - MACH EQ 101.43110.4044 14040 287 00091
~C FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
/31/97 12;38;30 Schedule of Bills GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 5
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P ID LINE
PLUMBERY/THE
DEP REG-HEATER REPAIR 83.13 REPAIR & MTC - MACH & EQ 101.41990,4044 14084 287 00092
SHOP-MAINT SUPPLIES 50.57 MISC REPAIR & MTC SUP PLI 101.43127.2299 4132-1465 287 00090
AN SHELTER-PLUMBING 7,766.45 BUILDINGS 101.42701.5201 7391 287 00094
8,156,87 *VENDOR TOTAL
PREUSSE/JAMES L
CH-CLEANING 460.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 101.41940,3110 DECEMBER 287 00095
DEP REG""CLEAN ING 120.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 101.41990.3110 DECEMBER 287 00096
PW"".cL EAN I NG 150.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 101.43110.3110 DECEMBER 287 00097
730.00 *VENDOR TOTAL
QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS C
LIQUOR 882.82 LIQUOR 609.49750.2510 287 00098
WINE 1,274.05 WINE 609,49750,2530 287 00099
2,156,87 *VENDOR TOTAL
RIVERSIDE OIL
WWTP-DIESEL 1,024.53 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI S 436.49201,2199 19641 287 00100
~'S GOURMET ICE
CE 190.50 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 287 00101
SALZWEDEL/PATRICIA
AN SHELTER-TRAVEL EXP 27.72 TRAVEL EXPENSE 101.42701.3310 287 00063
AN SHELTER-SUPPLI ES 76.65 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIES 101,42701,2199 287 00064
AN SHELTER CONTRACT 2,259.40 PROF SRV - ANIMAL CTR o 101,42701.3120 DECEMBER 287 00061
2,363.77 *VENDOR TOTAL
SCHLUENDER CONSTRUCTION
WWTP-FILL SAND 2,827.50 PROF SRV .. CONSTRUCT! N 436.49201,3025 2705 287 00102
SENSIBLE LAND USE COALIT
CH--CORP MEMBERSH I PS 200,00 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.41910.4330 287 00105
SHERBURNE COUNTY CITIZEN
PET AD 30.00 ADVERTISING 609.49754.3499 13963 287 00106
SIMPSON/CYNTHIA R
FIRE HALL CLEANING 50.00 PROF SRV - CUSTODIAL 101.42201.3110 DECEMBER 287 00107
SPRINGSTED
97A GO BOND 250,00 FISCAL AGENTS' FEES 332.47001.6201 287 00108
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT SUP
LIBRARY-PAPER TOWELS 46.69 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 211.45501.4399 14398 287 00104
4111JAXABLE MISC 165,24 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 386054 287 00103
211.93 *VENDOR TOTAL
~C FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF MONTICELLO
/31/97 12:38:30 Schedule of Bi 11 s GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 6
VENOOR NAME
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME FUND & ACCOUNT CLAIM INVOICE PO# F/P 10 LINE
SUPERIOR SERVICES-CENTRA
RECYCLING 3,591.57 PROF SRV - RECYCLING ON 101.43230.3101 NOVEMBER 287 00109
TELXON CORPORATION
REFUSE COLLECTION 688.80 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 101.43230.3190 48830 287 00110
THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMP
BEER 6,699.60 BEER 609.49750.2520 122415 287 00111
TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS,
LIQUOR"PRINTER RI BBON 250.00 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 609.49754.2099 5606 287 00112
U SLINK
CITY HALL 46.13 TELEPHONE 101.41301.3210 287 00114
FIRE DEPT 0.57 TELEPHONE 101.42201.3210 287 00115
AN SHELTER 1.98 TELEPHONE 101.42701.3210 287 00116
WA TER 3.06 TELEPHONE 601.49440.3210 287 00117
PW 23.89 TELEPHONE 101.43110.3210 287 00118
BLDG INSP 12.86 TELEPHONE 101.42401.3210 237 00119
DEP REG 4.07 TELEPHONE 101.41990.3210 287 00120
.W INSP 1. 58 TELEPHONE 101.43115.3210 287 00121
IQUOR 8.81 TELEPHONE 609.49754.3210 287 00122
ATER 1.06 TELEPHONE 101.43120.3210 287 00123
104.01 *VENDOR TOTAL
URBAN LAND INSTITUTE
PARKS-SUBSCRI PTION 44.95 DUES, MEMBERSHIP & SU SC 101.45201.4330 287 00113
US WEST DIRECTORY ADVERT
LIQUOR-YELLOW PAGES 32.00 ADVERTISING 609.49754.3499 287 00124
VIDEO PROTECTION SERVICE
LIQUOR"CAMERA & MONITOR 1.162.12 OTHER EQUIPMENT 609.49754.5801 1205, 1211 287 00125
VIKING COCA COLA
PW-POP 69.86 MISC OTHER EXPENSE 101.43110.4399 . 287 00126
LIQUOR-TAXABLE MISC 442.45 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 287 00127
512.31 *VENDOR TOTAL
WATSON COMPANY, INC/THE
TAXABLE MISC 122.06 MISC TAXABLE 609.49750.2540 506067 287 00128
Y.M.C.A. OF MINNEAPOLIS
CONTRACT 625.00 MISC PROFESSIONAL SER IC 101.45171.3199 DECEMBER 287 00129
lEE MEDICAL SERVICE
eUPPLIES 68.70 MISC NON TAXABLE 609.49150.2550 54121983 281 00130
~C FINANCIAL SYSTEM
./31/97 12:38:30
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION
REPORT TOTALS:
.
.
AMOUNT ACCOUNT NAME
998,335.63
RECORDS PRINTED - 000131
Schedule of Bills
FUND & ACCOUNT
CLAIM INVOICE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL540R-V04.30 PAGE 7
PO# FIP 10 LINE
~.. RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
'111'/31/97 12:39:20
Schedule of Bills
FUND RECAP;
FUND DESCRIPTION
01 BURSEMENTS
101 GENERAL FUND
211 LIBRARY FUND
240 CAPITAL PROJECT REVOLVING FD
332 1997A G.O. IMPR BOND
436 93-14C WWTP EXPANSION PRJ
458 97-04C KLEIN FARMS PHASE 2
601 WATER FUND
602 SEWER FUND
609 MUNICIPAL LIQUOR FUND
651 RIVERSIDE CEMETERY
37,057.35
7,350.18
80.50
250.00
906,498.75
732.13
6,047.67
351. 58
39,612.47
355.00
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
998,335.63
BANK RECAP:
.~
NAME
DISBURSEMENTS
GENL GENERAL CHECKING
LIQR LIQUOR CHECKING
958,723.16
39.612.47
TOTAL ALL BANKS
998,335.63
THE PRECEDING LIST OF BILLS PAYABLE WAS REVIEWED ANO APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.
DATE ............
APPROVED BY
.p . . . ~ . . . .. ;. . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. t " .. . .. . .. . .
.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GL060S-V04.30 RECAPPAGE
GL540R