Loading...
1988-02-16 CC Agenda/Packet-..sp- CCPCV CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 16, 1988 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES -- *February 1, 1988 February 9, 1988 (will receive Tuesday evening) _r0601ED IV. COMMUNITY FORUM V. VI. LTA OVIII. 7:05 Sharon Griel--Request to install Pull Tab Booth at Ronay's on Main 7:15 Dennis Boese--Community Celebration Button *7:30 Richard and Nancy Bistodeau--Safety Data Sheets for the construction of Elementary School Addition 8:00 David Stromberg--Contract regarding dog catching *8:45 Pat Meyer's request for Tax Increment Financing DEPARTMENT BUSINESS a. Legal - Other Business b. Engineering k`— Accept Feasibility Reports - Call for Public Hearing - Call for Feasibility on B. Braun's Addition Improvements - PPM Update Other Business c. Maintenance - Selling of Surplus Equipment - Problem with blowing snow in the road right-of-way - Other Business d. Administration *- Income Received and Bills to be Paid *- Discussion of Computer Purchase - Planning Commission Vacancy - Update on Legislative Conference *- Darkenwald's Application for Planned Development Zoning - Other Business - MEMBER'S REPORT *- Donatus Vetsch--Report of Police Protection OTHER BUSINESS *- Letter from Jones Intercable *- Sherrif's Report *- Information on 'Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's SAC Charges MOTION TO ADJOURN 4 Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 16, 1988 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES -- *February 1, 198B February 9, 1988 (will receive Tuesday evening) TGL�OIE� IV. COMMUNITY FORUM 7:05 Sharon Griel--Request to install Pull Tab Booth at Ronay's on Main 7:15 Dennis Boese--Community Celebration Button *7:30 Richard and Nancy Bistodeau--Safety Data Sheets for the construction of Elementary School Addition 8:00 David Stromberg--Contract regarding dog catching *8:45 Pat Meyer's request for Tax Increment Financing V. DEPARTMENT BUSINESS a. Legal - Other Business b. Engineering - Accept Feasibility Reports Call for Public Hearing Call for Feasibility on B. Braun's Addition Improvements - PPM Update - Other Business c. Maintenance - Selling of Surplus Equipment - Problem with blowing snow in the road right-of-way - Other Business d. Administration *- Income Received and Bills to be Paid *- Discussion of Computer Purchase Planning Commission Vacancy Update on Legislative Conference *- Darkenwald's Application for Planned Development Zoning Other Business VI. MEMBER'S REPORT *- Donatus Vetsch--Report of Police Protection VII. OTHER BUSINESS *- Letter from Jones Intercable *- Sherrif's Report *- Information on Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's SAC Charges VIII. MOTION TO ADJOURN 0 Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1988 The regular meeting of the Albertville City Council was called to order by Mayor Loretta Roden. Members present included Gary Schwenzfeier, Donatus Vetsch and Bob Braun, with Council member Don Cornelius absent. Others present included Maureen Andrews, Bob Miller, Thore Meyer, Bob Sullentrap, Brad Farnham and Dan Wilson. The Council reviewed the agenda for the evening's meeting. A motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. The minutes of the February 1, 1988, Council meeting were reviewed and approved. A motion was made by Donatus Vetsch to approve the minutes, which was then seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier. All were in favor and the motion carried. The review of the minutes of the work meeting held February 9, 1988, were tabled until the first meeting in March. Ms. Sharon Griel of the Multiple Sclerosis Society was present to request permission to sell pull -tabs at Ronay's on Main. The Council was informed that a booth would be set up on the bar side of the resturant and that the M.S. Society would be looking for a local person to sell the pull -tabs. Maureen Andrews asked if Ms. Griel had brought along copies of the information showing the agreement between the M.S. Society and Ronay Heildelberger and the plan for the location of the booth. Ms. Griel stated that she was surprised that the City had not received the information because it had been sent out prior to the meeting. She assured the Council that she would send another set of information out to the City on Wednesday morning. There was no other discussion so a motion was made to approve the pull -tab license for the Multiple Sclerosis Society. The motion was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Bob Braun. The motion was approved pending the City's receiving the information. The Council next reviewed the issue regarding the construction site at the elementary school. The Council was informed that Nancy Bistodeau had requested that the City check to see if we could require the contractor to supply data sheets on materials used during the construction on premise of the site. Maureen explained that Nancy and Richard Bistodeau had requested to be on the agenda, but because of a family illness would not be attending the meeting. Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 2 In an effort to be able to respond to Mrs. Bistodeau's request, Maureen requested that Loren Kohnen, the City Building Inspector, research the issue and be prepared to answer any questions that might arise regarding the issue. A memo (attached to the official minutes) was reviewed by the Council, in which Loren stated that the school plans were reviewed by both the City Building Inspector and the State Building Code Division. This review determined that the plans and materials meet state code. The memo further stated that if any problems arise from the project that it is the sole responsibility of the contractor, architect and building owner to correct any and all problems. Because of these findings, it was determined that the City is not responsible for requiring that the safety data sheets be located on the site of construction, but rather the School District should follow through on taking the necessary action to assure that the proper information is available. Maureen was asked to follow up with a letter to the school, letting them know that the problem had been brought to the City's attention and ask that they follow up on Mr. and Mrs. Bistodeaus's request. It was also requested that Maureen follow up with the Bistodeau's and inform them of the City's findings. The records should note that there was no new legal business that the Council needed to take action on. The Council next reviewed the feasibility reports for the 1988 improvement projects and took the necessary action on each of the following reports (a copy of each of the feasibility reports has been included as part of the official Council packet): BARTHEL MANOR - 2nd ADDITION (1988-2): The engineers reviewed with the Council their finding on the proposed street improvements for Barthel Manor 2nd Addition. The project will consist of surmountable curb and gutter throughout the project with the exception of Barthel Industrial , which will be improved using the standard B-618 curb. The street surface will consist of a 3 inch bituminous base in the residential area and 4 inches on the extension of Barthel Industrial Drive. Some minor gravel replacement and shaping was also included in the cost of the improvement. All the boulevards shall be shaped with black dirt and seeded. The estimated cost of the improvement totaled $137,900.00, which included a cost breakdown of Engineering, local legal administration, and contingencies. This figure does not take into account any bonding or financing costs (which will be added prior to the notice being printed in the Crow River News). It was found and determined that the Engineers for the City reported that the street improvement for Barthel Manor - 2nd Addition is feasible and should be made as proposed. A motion accepting the findings of the Barthel Manor - 2nd Addition (1988-1) Feasibility Report was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. PSYK'S 4th ADDITION: The discussion on Psyk's 4th Addition was tabled because Doug Psyk decided not to request the improvements be done in 1988. HIGHWAY 37 TRUNK SEWER IMPROVEMENT (INTERCEPTOR LIFT STATION & FORCEMAIN) 1988-2 The engineers reviewed with the Council their findings on the proposed expansion of the sewer system (interceptor, lift station and forcemain). The report described the project location and each element of the project: COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 3 INTERCEPTOR - will consist of a 2,450 foot, 12 inch gravity line which will service the Darkenwald development area and will be connected into the existing 12 inch pipe which will allow for future sanitary sewer service for the area north of the interstate. LIFT STATION - will be a submersible pump lift station, containing 2 - 175 gpm pumps and will service most of the remaining undeveloped land in Albertville. The report notes that it does not include costs for a standby generator or a building to house the lift station controld. The report states that a stand-by generator will be needed at the time that additional connections would be made to the system, but will likely be recommended at at later date. Additionally, the report goes on to state that a building to house the controls and an alarm system had been requested by Ken Lindsay. These costs were not included but the the report states the engineers could supply them at the Council's request. FORCEMAIN - will be a 6 inch ductile iron pipe and at the railroad crossing the engineers proposed to use a 30 - inch casing with both a 6 inch pipe inside to eliminate a second jacking under the railroad at the time a larger line would need to be built. The estimated cost of the improvements totaled $215,735.00. This figure included a cost breakdown of engineering, local legal, administration and contingencies, but does not include any bonding or financing costs. (These costs will be added by Juran and Moody prior to bond issuance). It was found and determined that the Engineers for the City reported that the Highway 37 Trunk Sewer Improvement (1988-2) is feasible and should be made as proposed. A motion accepting the findings of the feasibility report was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. DARKENWALD DEVELOPMENT - PHASE 1 (1988-3): The engineers reviewed with the Council their findings on the proposed improvements for the Darkenwald development "Westwind". The project will include: SANITARY SEWER - consisting of 2,800 feet of 8 inch PVC pipe and sewer services of 6 inch line for the apartments and 4 inch for the residential lots. The system will discharge into the proposed Highway 37 interceptor. WATERMAIN - consisting of 1,450 feet of 8 inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) trunk watermain from the intersection of C.S.A.H. 19 & 37 to the first phase of the Darkenwald development. The watermain within the plat will consist of 1,550 feet of 8 inch DIP and 1,400 feet of 6 inch DIP. The service lines will be 1 inch copper for the residential lots and 6 inch DIP for the multiple lots. STORM SEWER - consisting of 12 inch to 33 inch pipe conveying the storm water runnoff from the low areas and other critical drainage points to the proposed future streets and will discharge into County Ditch No. 9. STREETS - will consist of a 3 inch bituminous pavement and surmountable curb and gutter placed over a 12 inch gravel base. Restoration will consist of seeding or sodding as required. The estimated cost of the improvement totals $620,700.00 and includes engineering, local legal, administration and contingencies. This figure does not take into account any bonding or financing costs (which will be added prior to the notice being printed in the Crow River News). COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 4 It was found and determined by the City Engineer that said improvement for the Darkenwald Development - Phase I are feasible and should be made as proposed. A motion accepting the findings of the Darkenwald Development Phase I Feasibility Report was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. The minutes should note that the City had received a petition for improvements from 100°0' of properties, which waived the right to an assessment hearing. The Council was informed by the City Attorney that even with the petition, he likes to see the improvement hearing held "just in case" problems might occur later. The City Engineer agreed with this discussion. As a result, a motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier to hold a public hearing on March 7, 1988, at 7:30 on said improvements. Mr. Dennis Boese was present to show the Council his color design for the Albertville Friendly City Days. The Council agreed that they liked the yellow/grren/blue combination which Mr. Boese thinks can be obtained by screening the design. Maureen was asked to check with Carol Larson regarding the cost of buttons for 1,00 and 2,000. In addition, she was asked to check on the button numbering system, both on the button and for drawing prizes. The Council authorized an additional $50.00 to get the design camera ready. A motion to approve the design coloring and $50.00 expenditure was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. Mr. Doug Psyk was present at the meeting and informed the Council that he is having a problem with 4 wheel drive vehicles in Psyk's 4th Addition. Maureen stated she would contact the Sheriff's Office regarding the problem. Bob Braun requested that the Council undertake a feasibility report for improvements for his proposed development 1988-4. A motion calling for the feasibility report was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier. The record should note that Bob Braun obstained from voting, all others voted in favor of the motion's approval. Bob Sullentrap briefly updated the Council on the PPM water problem. He informed the Council that 30 days had passed since the firm had been noticed of the problem with no response. It was agreed that Bob should follow up with another call, and if no action is taken at that time, some legal steps may need to be taken to resolve the issue once and for all. Ken Lindsay requested through the administrator the City consider selling 3 pieces of equipment. The Council tabled this discussion until a later meeting. Gary Schwenzfeier informed the Council that Ken had requested that a notice be put in the paper regarding the blowing of snow into the street and that letters be sent out to those people who violate the state law governing littering; which is the law pertaining to placing snow back into the street. The Council next reviewed the income received and bills to be paid. The Council was informed that the Water Products bill still has not been corrected should not be paid. With no other questions or comments on the bills, a motion was made by Bob Braun and a second by Gary Schwenzfeier approving the bills with the exception of the Water Products bill. All were in favor and checks 8507 through 8514, except 8517 were paid. The Council briefly reviewed the information on the computer system. No action was taken at this time but will be discussed at the next meeting. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 5 The Council was informed that a vacancy on the Planning Commission has occured. There was some discussion who could fill the position. Maureen was asked to contact Kevin Mealhouse and Duane Sweep regarding their interest in serving on the Commission. Gary Schwenzfeier and Maureen Andrews briefly reviewed the program from the League's Legislative Conference with the Council. A more detailed report will be given at a later meeting. The Darkenwald project was briefly reviewed by the Council. Donatus expressed his concern about the dept of the lots. Maureen stated she would pass this on to the developers. Doug Psyk asked about the size of the lots and why the City was not requiring the standard 12,500 square foot lots. It was explained that the Darkenwald project was being developed under the planned development concept providing for more flexibility. Donatus Vetsch reviewed with the Council the findings of the meeting with Sheriff's representative regarding the current police coverage (materials included in Council packet). Donatus stated that another meeting was going to be scheduled in March and suggested that some of the other Council might like to attend as well. Maureen was asked to check on a police refund of some $4,900.00 for the next meeting. The Council agreed that there needed to be another work meeting to review the feasibility reports and other bonding issues. The meeting was set for February 29, 1988, at 7:00. Brad Farnham introduced Mr. Dan Wilson, with Wilson Management Services, a tax increment consultant. Brad explained that he had worked with Dan since 1980, first working with him in Waconia. It was explained that Dan's specialty is in the area of tax increment financing, plan writing and develop- ment programs. Dan told the Council that he was looking forward to working with the City on future projects. He told the Council that he was familiar with the area because his wife is from the Rogers area. He explained to the Council what he has done for the cities of Maple Plain, Buffalo, and Rockford, along with several other communities. Dan briefly discussed with the Council what he perceived Mr. Doug Guber's rationale for the very broad range, may have been because of the fact the money of the cost involved with a gas station/convenience store do not qualify towards the tax increment. Dan stated that the range could be the result of the County not having a full set of plans, specifications and cost breakdown. Maureen explained that they did the information. Finally, Dan stated that when working with Wright County before., he has not seen them use this large of a spread. There was no other discussion so Dan then thanked the Council again for the opportunity to work with them. The next issue discussed by the Council was the tax increment financing for the Pat Meyer Phillips 66 Station. Brad reviewed with the Council the report entitled Council Action Item, which summarized the events that occured during the course of the discussion with Meyer and his attorney. In addition, there was additional discussion regarding the Tax Increment Position Statement. John Gries asked if Brad prepared this information and was told, yes. Brad went on to say that the papers were the result of the work meeting on February 9, 1988. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 6 John stated that he agreed that there were several problems working against the project: 1. The cost of the land improvement 2. The cost of the project 3. The position the County assessor took on the project There was discussion about the issue of the pass thru. John questioned where the amount $10,000.00 was arrived at. It was explained that based on other pass thru's that Juran and Moody have been involved in, that $10,000.00 was a conservative figure. John stated that assuming there was in fact a $10,000.00 charge, he assumed that it could be paid for by the developer up front over the life of the increment. It was pointed out that it was the intent of Council that they would not subsidize these expenses. There was also discussion regarding the comparison of land and proposal to other tax increment projeets. As in an earlier meeting, it was pointed out that each project should be reviewed on its own merit and must support itself and in this case the numbers were not there. John stated that he saw the issue as a two sided sword. The County put too low of an assessed value on the property to generate enough tax increment, but that if the project is built, the County will place a higher value on the property for taxing purposes. Additionally, it was pointed out that all the financial applicatons were completed anticipating the tax increment financing and that without the asssistance, the project may not be built. Pat Meyer stated that he was upset with the course of events that has occured. He stated that he felt that he would be atttibuting to the local economy through the jobs he was generating. He also stated that he felt let down by the City, that they were not "making our City...your City". At this time, Brad walked through each of the three action items: 1. The Council finds that the Tax Increment generated by theMeyer project is not at the magnitude to warrant public assistance consideration. --Using the figures from the County, it was determined that the public partici- pation for the project would not likely exceed $28,000.00. Brad stated he felt that the Council were comfortable with the conservation range of money available. John asked what would be determined to be a "sufficent magnitude" Lo warrant a pass thru of the increment. It was pointed out that there was no "magic" number, but based on the discussion at the work meeting, the Council felt that in order to consider this project it would have to come in at the high end of the range prepared by the County, and even then the Council would have to take the other two issues presented under consideration. 2. The project is similar to two existing adjacent businesses who have not been assisted with Tax Increment Financing. Assistance to the Meyer Project could give the appearance of unfair advantage. --John stated that he disagreed with this finding, stating he did not think there was a problem with the other two businesses. In addition, he stated that the City did assist the Hackenmueller project through the use of Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB). Brad pointed out this financing tool does not work on the same premise that Tax Increment Financing does, that it all actually just provides a net effect saving for the project, but no actual money. Bob Braun stated that he felt that he, along with the other members of the Council, were concerned about the possibility of putting one of the existing businesses out of business because of the fact tax increment is used on one project, which does not appear to support the increment. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES PAGE 7 3. The Council supports the Meyer Project, but will not, overtime, subsidize the $10,000.00 in City expenses to assist the project. --John stated that he did not feel this was even as issue because he knows the Council well enough to know that they would expect the up front costs to be paid for right away. At this time, Pat Meyer commented that he was somewhat frustrated with the process involved. He also told the Council that one of the County Assessor's had been heard to say that he did not think Albertville needed another gas station and that he felt that this statement had a direct impact on the lack of commitment by the assessor's office. It was stated that Barthel's group has not had this type of problem with the County before, that there has always been a willingness to work with the developer. Brad pointed out that maybe the assessor was being approached by the wrong people (Walt Hartman and Holmes and Graven) and that it really is the developer's responsibility to get the County to make a commitment. At this time it was pointed out that the Council was ready to act on the issue as presented, and that if Pat Meyer wanted to withdraw the proposal in order to have an opportunity to work on different numbers. John asked for a couple of minutes to speak with his client to find out how he wanted to proceed. It was pointed out to the Council that they would have to decide on how to respond to action item #2, provided that the discussion was continued. John stated that he did not feel that the Council had given the project a fair chance. Maureen stated that she disagreed with this statement because of the discussion that took place at the work meeting. She pointed out that it was a general concensus of the Council that if $28,000.00 would make or break the project that there had to be some concern about the security of the project. Again, it was pointed out that the Council wants to see Pat Meyer build in Albertville, but that in this case the project was not a strong tax increment risk. With no other discussion, a motion was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Bob Braun to deny the increment on the basis of action items 1 - 3. John requested at this time that the motion be withdrawn and the issue be tabled until such time the developer talked to the assessor again. Both Gary and Bob agreed to withdraw their motion. A new motion was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Bob Braun tabling the issue until such time the developer represents it to the Council. All were in favor and the motion carried. The records should note that the project figures will need to come in at the high end of the range before the City will reconsider the project. The Council received a verbal feasibility report on street maintenance. The City Engineer estimates the work to be completed will cost $65,000.00. A motion to approve the verbal feasibility and set an improvement hearing for street maintenance was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier. All were in favor and the motion carried. (Project number assigned to the project is 1988-5, while the Braun project has been assigned 1988-4). There was no other business so a motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded r"' by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 1988 PUBLIC HEARINGS Street Maintenance Projects Barthel Improvements Darkenwald Project Mayor - Call Street Maintenance Hearing to Order Andrews - Notice of Hearing Engineer - Work to be Undertaken Financial - Tax Impact/Special Assessments Public - Questlons/Answers Mayor - Close Hearings Mayor - Call Barthel Improvement Hearing to Order Andrews - Notice of Hearing Engineer - Work to be Undertaken Financial - Tax Impact/Special Assessments Public - Questions/Answers Mayor - Close Hearings Mayor - Call Hackenmueller Improvement Hearing to Order Andrews - Notice of Hearing Engineer - Work to be Undertaken Financial - Tax Impact/Special Assessments Public - Questions/Answers Mayor - Close Hearings Mayor - Call Darkenwald Improvement Hearing to Order Andrews - Notice of Hearing Engineer - Work to be Undertaken Financial - Tax Impact/Special Assessments Public - Questions/Answers Mayor - Close Hearings FEASIBILITY STUDY For. 1988-5 STREET MAINTENANCE City of Albertville, Minnesota E-880 I G 3 MEYER-ROHLIN,INC ENGINEERS.44 tARVEYORS 11HHwy.23N.,BNOu/1.S1.0M/nn. SS313 0 a F1 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR 1988-5 STREET MAINTENANCE Albertville, Minnesota February, 1988 E-8801-G Meyer-Rohlin, Inc. 1111 Highway 25 North Buffalo, Minnesota 612-682-1781 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the /IG State of Minnesota. Thore P. Meyer Reg. No. 6218 ■ a U N r r 0 d MEYER-ROHLIN, INC. ENGINEERS -LAND SURVEYORS 1111 Hwy. 25 N., Buffalo, Minn.55313 Phone 612-682-1781 Febj City of Albertville c/o Maureen Andrews, Administrator Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 Re: Feasibility Study for 1988-5, Street Maintenance Dear Members of the Council: Description As requested, we have conducted a feasibility study for Street Maintenance within the City of Albertville, as indicated on the attached sketch. Streets Proposed for Overlay - Lander Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast to 58th Street Northeast. - 56th Street Northeast from Lander Avenue Northeast to Main Avenue, and from Main Avenue to Large Avenue Northeast. - Large Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast to 57th Street Northeast. - 57th Street Northeast from Lake Avenue Northeast to Main Avenue, and from Main Avenue to the westerly end of 57th Street. Thore P. Meyer, Professional Engineer Robert Rohlin, Licensed Land Surveyor 9 A page 2 Streets Proposed for Seal Coat High Priority Streets - 60th Street Northeast from approximately 135' west of the intersection of 60th Street Northeast and Lamont Avenue Northeast to the westerly end of 60th Street Northeast. - Large Avenue Northeast from County Highway Number 37 south to Barthels Industrial Drive. - Barthels Industrial Drive from Large Avenue Northeast to the Burlington Northern Railway. - 58th Street Northeast from Main Avenue to Lander Avenue Northeast. - 56th Street Northeast from approximately 165' west of Lander Avenue Northeast westerly to Lander Avenue Northeast. - 55th Street Northeast from Main Avenue west to the end of 55th Street Northeast. - Lander Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast south to approximately 180, south of 55th Street Northeast. Low Priority Streets - 54th Street Northeast from Main Avenue east to Large Avenue Northeast and from Large Avenue Northeast to Barthels Industrial Drive. - 54th Circle. - Large Avenue Northeast from 54th Street Northeast north to approximately 160' south of 55th Street Northeast. i page 3 - 51st Street from Main Avenue east to approximately 170' west of 53rd Street Northeast. Existing Street Conditions The existing streets proposed for a bituminous overlay have developed extensive cracking and some differential settling. The existing streets proposed for seal coating all have fairly good structural stability, but are starting to deteriorate on the surface. The amount of deterioration is indicated by a high priority rating or low priority rating. Proposed Street Maintenance Streets proposed for overlay would first be patched prior to overlayment. This would consist of removing all badly cracked areas and rebuild the sub -base as needed, followed by patching. After completing the patching, a 12" bituminous mat can be laid to improve the structural stability and life of the street. Streets proposed for seal coating would receive a light coating of bituminous oil followed by pea rock on all streets except Barthels Industrial Drive, which would receive granite chips. IEstimated Costs Streets Proposed for Overlay - Lander Avenue Northeast Patching & Overlay $18,900 - 56th Street Northeast Patching S Overlay $ 9,635 r- Large Avenue Northeast Overlay $ 5,020 - 57th Street Northeast Patching S Overlay $22,000 $55,555 page 4 Streets Proposed for Seal Coat High Priority Streets - 60th Street Northeast $ 2,120 - 58th Street Northeast $ 800 - 56th Street Northeast $ 450 - 55th Street Northeast $ 1,300 - Lander Avenue Northeast $ 1,420 - Barthel Industrial Drive $ 5,400 TOTAL $11 , 490 Low Priority Streets - 54th Street Northeast $ 4,180 - 51st Street Northeast $ 2,850 - 54th Circle Northeast $ 1,200 - Large Avenue Northeast $ 900 TOTAL $ 9,130 Total Project Cost $76,175 Engineering (8%) 9,900 Contingencies (2%) 1,525 $87,600 Bonding and financing costs must be added to the above figures to provide a total project cost. Conclusion In conclusion, the above described improvements are feasible and will result in a benefit to the City of Albertville. Sincerely, MEYER-ROHLIN, INC. Bob Sullentrop Professional Engineer sl E-8801-G 4.- BITUMINOUS OqERLAY HIGH PRIORITY I SE L COAT - J..... ..... —lilll� CITY OF ALaERTViLLE v4plom-r COUNTY. 1M11ylywoor4 ti rer7ommi FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED BRAUN DEVELOPMENT ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA MARCH 1, 1988 E-8801-F MEYER- ROHLIN, INC ENG/NFF_RS•LAND SURVEYORS 1111 Hwy. 25N., Buffalo, Minn. 55313 4 4 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED BRAUN DEVELOPMENT Albertville, Minnesota March 1, 1988 ' E-8801-F J I I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the / State of Minnesota. Thore P. Meyer Reg. No. 6218 MEYER-ROHLIN, INC. � O ENGINEERS -LAND SURVEYORS 1111 Hwy. 25N., Buffalo, Minn.55313 Phone 612-682-1781 0 I--7 March 3; City of Albertville c/o Maureen Andrews, Administrator Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 Re: Proposed Braun Development Honorable Mayor & City Council: As requested, we have completed the Feasibility Study for the water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and street improvements for the above -referenced proposed development. Project Location The proposed development is located immediately south of the Albertville Elementary School and east of C.S.A.H. #35 on Lot C and Lot D of the W2 of the SE! of Section 1, Township 120, Range 24, Wright County, Minnesota. See attachment #1. Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer will consist of approximately 2550 feet of 8-inch PVC pipe discharging into the existing sanitary sewer on C.S.A.H. #35. Individual 4-inch services will be provided for each lot. A portion of the proposed collection system will require insulation over the sewer pipe because of the lack of sufficient cover (approximately 5-6 feet). See attachment #2. Thore P. Meyer, Professional Engineer Robert Rohlin, Licensed Land Surveyor Watermain The watermain will consist of approximately 2600 feet of 6" Ductile Iron Pipe looping from C.S.A.H. #35 to C.S.A.H. #35 and shall include the necessary gate valves and fire hydrants as requested by the Joint Powers Water Utility. The service lines will be 1" copper to each lot. See attachment #3. Storm Sewer The storm sewer will consist of various sections dis- charging into existing storm sewers on C.S.A.H. 35 and Barthel's Industrial Park. Additional drainage is extended into the existing pond with a controlled overflow into the Barthel Industrial Park storm sewer. See attachment #4. Streets The street improvements will consist of a 3-inch bituminous pavement and surmountable curb and gutter placed over a 12-inch gravel base. See attachment #4. Cost Estimate The following are the estimated described improvements. These have phases, as requested by the developer. costs for the above been divided into two Phase I will include Lots 14 through 26 on the north side Of 52nd Street, and Lots 15 through 24 on the south side of 52nd Street. (A total of 23 lots) Phase II will consist of the balance of the lots abutting 53rd Street, 53rd Circle and Lake Avenue. (27 lots) ' Phase I Sanitary 39,500.00 Water 38,000.00 ' Storm Sewer 21,500.00 Streets 60,000.00 159,000.00 Engineering, legal & admin. (15%) 23,850.00 Contingencies (5%) 7,950.00 TOTAL PHASE I 190,800.00 Phase II Sanitary Sewer 48,000 Water Main 43,500 Storm Sewer 22,000 Streets 76,800 190,300.00 Engineering, legal S admin. (15%) 28,550.00 Contingencies (5%) 9,550.00 TOTAL PHASE II $228,400.00 Bonding and financing costs must be added to the above figures to provide a total project cost. Conclusion We find the above described improvements to be feasible as proposed and will result in a benefit to the abutting properties. Respect ully submitted VMEYE- 0HL IN , INC. hore Meyer Professional En aineer sl File: E-8801-F t - Lb'LL4 •d - Le O �i _ J `t\\� --r _•III i � �II f Q `III • /// '•- uany aqoI .1 TTT Ll e ii - - a e.i —__ • I of • I �-.\., .. •`°�� Y el. m: �a VA _•; �.� i I �— 64T L • JIi� A' \°a .: � j \' e;N Of t.i .I a• + � is (�=.T- - ;' �'` °I ni=Zj N a e. •�i —IL-11 II� dy cq • _ I IL— —I \\ \ ♦ f `off\`� rule-_ _� � e i Stl• s-- e�j �I � • in or ' N + 1 •-� � I � I cif • N a I • N I • N fIL-.� ♦11 —_'\\\ •L •JIL —_��e _—_I ~ -- ►11 r.- ;� _ NLt SyyII e u. �`4 III♦ ' II Na III N• III .N� I ° •.1 �Q o �. WIN • e �`: (S£ 'oN �`-' H V S 7) L ZO LL4 liil� k"{e o •UID�y •y, ': 0 v cn N a O �1 ; bZ, L4•W -- / � __._� `----v'1 .I I .M I •aK I r.l / /�--.._. Lvc, d I r' I 1 40 \\`+\ _ of • �I ° ri I �--, ... _— ___ .aJ ° I o N • ° M a I � - � — .off I � Z� — J L —_---Li It k — __- -� �_ yl a --/ � �,- y j J (�' � + \ � 5j7yu~ J - I • V4 0 Y,', • _ _ r—' --.•li I � I � eat �^��I f ; \\\ ,I II N • J I :je N � I M ~ • N .. _ —_ \ �J I I --- _ • 1 -.I al I i N ! .i � i !1, I i N i +III N i +III .N I • J I i N I. %_! Y 0 5 aas ulo �Y .1x t —i-'�----�.-1 S� _ N. a� . H V S � 1 L --z� L44-�'v 1 1 Y"� • W s. ..... — '`.J�• .w.•.. I w._-". ....• • ��v ,.�..-., .Yu Il' 1q I � ...J ..•:l��w,'....s _ N N h v E 3 N 0 37 i \j IL tL 2 Al 1-7 j7. - MEYER-ROHLIN, INC. ENGINEERS -LAND SURVEYORS 1111 Hwy. 25 N., Buffalo, Minn. 55313 Phone 612 - 682-1781 February 17, 1988 City of Albertville c/o Maureen Andrews, Administrator Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 Re: Updated Costs for Hackenmueller's Project Honorable Mayor and City Council: We have updated the costs associated with the Hackenmueller project which consists of improving the north frontage road abutting the Hackenmueller's shopping site. The updated costs are as follows: Construction $7910.00 Engineering (13%) 1030.00 Legal (City Attorney)(1%) 80.00 Administrative (1%) 80.00 Contingencies (5%) 400.00 Project Cost $9500.00 These costs do not include the costs of bonding and financing which must be added to the above figures to provide a total project cost. Also, these costs are based on the project being done in conjunction with another project. If it is done separately, the costs would be somewhat higher. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, MEYER-ROHLIN, INC. Bob Sullentrop Professional Engineer sl File: E-8601-I Thore P. Meyer, Professional Engineer Robert Rohlin, Licensed Land Surveyor INCOME RECEIVED MARCH 7, 1988 SEWER ACCOUNTS 1,563.60 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTOR INC. 12,050.00 HEALTH CENTRAL OF BUFFALO 29,156.25 JIM LEUER CONSTRUCTION 425.20 JUDY BEAUDRY 10.00 BOB BRAUN 100.00 LeROY WELTER 9,844.39 WRIGHT TITLE GUARANTEE CO. 20.00 $53,169.44 BILLS TO BE PAID MARCH 7, 1988 ROGERS TIRE SERVICE 59.50 COMMUNICATION AUDITORS 27.77 WRIGHT COUNTY MAYOR'S ASSOCIATION 80.00 DAKOTA COUNTY TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 130.00 ANOKA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 450.00 WATER PRODUCTS CO. 153.32 SCHUMM ELECTRIC MOTOR SERVICE 25.15 ROBERT MINEMA 275.00 DON'S AUTO SERVICE & REPAIR 169.04 SIMONSON LUMBER 308.76 G.D.LaPLANT 33.00 D.J.'S TOTAL HOME CARE CENTER 90.08 A U.S.POST OFFICE 66.00 UNITED TELEPHONE 133.86 WRIGHT COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT 69.60 MEDICS TRAINING INC. 34.00 NSP 2,269.80 MAUREEN ANDREWS 587.81 MAUREEN ANDREWS 85.00 .-,KEN LINDSAY 654.00 A KEN LINDSAY 85.00 MIKE MERGES 159.00 LOREENE VILLAREAL 279.77 LORETTA RODEN 157.68 GARY SCHWENZFEIER 110.00 DONATUS VETSCH 1-30 0-0- BOB BRAUN 120.00 PERA 146.44 MINNEGASCO 332.79 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR-TRESURER 10.00 DON CORNELIUS 65.00 SUBTOTAL $7,495.03 1-1,j .CEO r1 SEWER BILLS MAUREEN ANDREWS KILIAN HARDWARE HACKENMUELLER'S vQisc QQ ADDITIONAL INCOME RECIEVED MARCH 7, 1988 ADDITIONAL BILLS TO BE PAID MARCH 7, 1988 266.70 148.50 11.86 38.90 $199.26 METRO WEST INSPECTION SERVICES, INC. Loren Kohnen, Pres. (612) 479-1720 February 25, 1988 MEMO TO: Matson, Wegleitner & Abendroth Architects, Inc. FROM: Loren Kohnen, ,ilding In:., it RE: Albertville Elementary School Addition The following items are required for the final inspection of the above - referenced school addition: 1) Research report on the one (1) hour ceilings (acoustical tile). 2) Roof has to be finished. 3) Mechanical roof units are not on the site and have not been installed. 4) Grease trap must be provided as noted in the original permit and plans. 5) Cracked blocks in various areas must be repaired or replaced. 6) Engineer must provide letter explaining why these cracks occurred. 7) Contractor must provide letter stating that the alarm system installed in the school corridors has been tested and is in working condition. 8) Fire hydrant as required by the Albertville Fire Department and noted on the original permit and plans must be installed before any occupancy of any kind is allowed. 9) Parking lot has to be resurfaced in order to support emergency vehicles. 10) Sidewalks must be completed to the street for the safety of the children that are entrusted to the Albertville -St. Michael School Board. 11) Electric must be finaled by the State Electrical Inspector. 12) Minnesota State Health Department must issue letter stating that the kitchen meets the State Health Code. If there are any questions concerning the above, please contact me. LK:jk cc: Albertville City Council Maureen Andrews Albertville -St. Michael School Board David vetsch, Fire Chief Ken Lindsay, Public Works City Attorney File 4390 Woodhill Drive, Lt nesota 55357 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 March 7, 19BB Mr. Ahmed AbuAyed Abendroth, Rego & Youngquist Arcitects, Inc. NOrth Plaza Building 5217 Wayzata Boulevard St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 RE: Fire Hydrant for STMA Elementary School Dear Mr. AbuAyed: This letter is to inform you that the Albertville Fire Department met and discussed your request to delay the installation of the fire hydrant at the school until the frost is out of the ground. The Department, after careful consideration, has voted to deny this request on the following grounds: 1. The Department originally requested that two hydrants be installed at the school, but through negotiations, finally settled for the one at the approved location. The Fire Department felt then, and still feel, that the hydrant is necessary and esential to the welfare and safety of the facility and students using the school in the case of fire. 2. The Department also believes that the hydrant could have been installed last fall when other water line extension work was being done; therefore, the school would not have incurred any additional expenses from winter charges. 3. The Department also cites the fact that currently there is limited accessibility to the building for an emergency because of the fact that the parking lot is not completed. As frost comes out of the ground, the Department will not be able to get close to the building with our vehicles, which could cause untimely delays in fire fighting. The installation of the hydrant will reduce some of these delays. If you have any questions or would like to discuss our decision, please feel free to contact me at 497-3060. Sincerely, CITY OF ALBERTVILLE David Vetsch Fire Chief cc: City Council STMA School Board Make our City........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business Loren Kohnen, Building Inspector CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 March 7, 1988 Mr. Mario DeMatteis, Superintendent St. Michael - Albertville School District 101 Central Avenue West St. Michael, Minnesota 55376 RE: Use of Degreaser at the Elementary School in Albertville Dear Mr. DeMatteis: Please find attached a copy of the minutes from our meeting on January 5, 1988, and the list of approved degreaser which can be used at the school. Per our meeting, we agreed that the school would not need to install a grease trap provided that degreaser is used on a regular basis and that no other problems occur. If you have any questions regarding the findings of minutes or the list of degreasers, please feel free to contact me 497-3384. Sincerely, CITY OF ALBERTVILLE Maureen T. Andrews City Administrator/Clerk cc: Albertville City Council Mr. Loren Kohnen, Building Inspector Mr. Thore Meyer, City Engineer Mr. Ken Lindsay, City Maintenance Mr. Warren Hallberg, School's Engineer Mr. Ahmed AbuAyed, Architect MA/Iv Enclosure Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business SPECIAL MEETING REGARDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL'S GREASE PROBLEM JANUARY 5, 1987 The meeting regarding the Elementary school's "grease" problem was convened on January 5, 1988. Persons present included Maureen Andrews, Ken Lindsay, Gary Schwenzfeier, Thore Meyer, Mario DeMatteis, Merl Schum and Warren Hallberg. Some general background information relating to the events of the summer and fall which lead up to this scheduled meeting was discussed. This information included: On June 25, 1987, Mr. Warren Hallberg met with Ken Lindsay and Maureen Andrews to discuss the grease problem at the elementary school. In the course of the discussion the possibility of installing a grease trap was listed as a possible alternative to the solution of the problem. This solution had been mentioned in an earlier discussion between Mr. Burke of the Elementary school and Ken Lindsay. It was the contention of Mr. Hallberg that the school could not install a greasetrap because of its location to the dishwasher and garbage disposal. In a phone conversation on July 1, 1987 and in a followup letter on July 14, 1987 the problem was discussed again. At this time, it was the opinion of the City Engineer, Chuck Eberhard, and Ken Lindsay that if an aprroved degreaser was used by the school and that annual cleaning of the school's sewerline was maintained that a greasetrap would not be required. In the letter dated July 14, 1987 the City reserved the tight to review the issue and request additional meetings to resolve any potential problems. On December 7, 1987 a letter was sent to Mr. Mario DeMatteis, the St. Michael -Albertville School Superintendanct, requesting a meeting to discuss the type of degreaser being used by the elementary school. This meeting was requested as the result of fact that Mr. Ken Lindsay had become aware of the fact that the degreaser being used by the school did not contain bacteria or enzymes which organically breakdown grease buildup. A meetitng to resolve the problem was suggested and then scheduled. Once the background information was reviewed the group began discussing the problem and the following documentation is the results of the meeting. Mr. Hallberg stated that in his past expirenses when working with schools that he has never had any problem with grease buildup at schools, because schools do not create grease common to fast-food type resturants. He feels that any problem at the school•is the result of a problem with the City's sewerline. Mr. Gary Schwenzfeier, Councilmember, disagreed with this statement and said that an inspection of the manhole proves that there is a buildup of grease in the line. Mr. Hallberg responded to this statement by saying that the buildup could be the result of the wast standing in the line because of a dip or obstruction in the mainline. PAGE 3 excessable for televising. Mr. DeMatheis asked if the school was willing to televise the line and the city found that there was a significant drop in the line would the city be willing to make the necessary repairs on the line? It was explained by Thore Meyer and Ken Lindsay that the cost of teIevisin)g a line is very expensive because of all the factors involved, which include: travel time, setup time from two directions in a case such as this one, plus the cost per foot for doing the line. Thore pointed out that it would be more cost effective to televise this line when another area in town was being televised to keep some of the cost down. Thore Meyer also pointed out that the Cityhas to weigh the cost of maintaining a demaged line through annual maintenance with the cost of reconstruction. And that when the benefits of replacing the line out weighs the maintenance costs involved that then the City Council would have to look at replacing the line. At this point, however, the City feels that through the maintenance program the line is being maintained in a mannor that does not justify the reconstruction cost involved. Mr. DeMatheis asked if the use of the degreaser is a temporary solution or a long term solution to the problem. The use of degreaser is a long term solution because grease can be traced out to the ponds. Mr. DeMatheis also asked how volatile is a chemical based degreaser on the line. Ken stated that there could be a problem with chemical base degreasers on the line. Mr. Hallberg stated that he did agree that there was a problem at the site were the school line feeds into the City line, but that it is a waste of money to jet the line each year. Mr. Hallberg asked if it would be acceptable if the school'agreed to use a degreaser approved by the City would they be required to continue to jet the line. It was pointed out bt this time the the school sewerline has a 4 inch drop in grade and that with that drop the lines tends to selfclean itself. Mr. DeMatheis asked what were the current costs to the district? Mr. Schumm stated that the school currently has the cost of the degreaser plus the cost of the jetting of the line. It was finally agreed that if the school would use an approved degreaser from a list of products provided by the City of Albertville, that the City would agree'that it would not be necessary for the school to have to jet their lines on an annual basis. The City will attempt to draw a list of approved product after discussing the problem with the MPCA, but that any product being used must be an enzyme or bacteria based. The question was asked why the school changed the type of degreaser. Mr. Schumm said that a sales representative selling a degreaser recommended the product as being the best on the market. There was also some discussion about how the dip in the line first appeared and Ken stated that it was his recollection that the school's waterline broke in the winter time and that when the repair was made that it was cold and it appeared that packing may have been difficult to do. Ken also stated that the epair was made by the Joint Powers and that the City was not involved with making any repairs. The Joint Power's Board may have more detail information on when the repair was made and by whom. PAGE 2 In an earlier phone conversation between Mr. Hallberg and Maureen Andrews, Ms. Andrews stated that it is common practice for cities to have established maintenance programs for cleaning sewerlines. Mr. Hallberg stated that when checking with other cities he had found that very few contracted their sewerline cleaning out. It was pointed out that the issue was not contracting the service out, but rather the maintenance program. Mr. Thore Meyer stated that many cities have their own equipment and do not need to contract with a company such as Roto-rooter. Mr. Meyer went on to say that the City is aware of some dips in the sewerline and for that reason when schedule maintenance is done on the system the areas were potential problems can arise are cleaned on an annual basis. At some point it may become cost effective to replace the problem areas or purchase equipment for line cleaning, but until that time the City is taking the necessary steps to keep the line trouble free. Mr. Hallberg went onto ask why the ;new sewerline was not being used to move the waste away from the school. It was explained that is line was installed for emergency purposes so it there was another blockage that shool would not have to be closed down why repairs were being made. The City went on to further explain that even if the new line was was used the City would require that pretreatment of the waste be done. Basis for this requirement is that the City's sewer ordinance states that if a business discharges waste that is detrimental to the operation of the plant, that based on the operator's recommendation that pretreatment can be require. Ken Lindsay then asked Mr. DeMatheis is he had a problem with the requirements being set forth by the City. Mr. DeMatheis stated that he did not have any problems with what was being discussed, but that he wanted to see the problem resolved. Mr. Hallberg next pointed out that when the sewerline running from the old addition of the schoold was removed so that cast iron pipe could be installed as part of the school addition that there was no trace of waste buildup in the line, and that based on that inspection does not feel the problem warrents annual cleaning or the installation of a greasetrap. Mr. DeMatheis stated that it was a real concern of the School District that if a problem continues down the Xlo--, that it will dumped all back on the school. He questioned if there was some joint responsiblity to the problem. He alRn asked if there were some options available for resolving the problem once and for all and who would be responsible for any expenses incurred in doing so. The City explained that maintenance of the line is being assisted by requiring pretreatment of waste going into the line through the use of degreaser and wastetraps and that the school is not being singled out. Gary Schwenzfeier stated that the preventative maintenance program which has been established by the city will hopefully reduce any potentials for problems. There was then some discussion about whether or not the line in question .-. had even been televised and if not wh of the cost and time involved the line •was enot ldone ythisted summertwhenause another project was being done. Maureen also stated that in an earlier converation with Mr. Hallberg that she had stated that she thought the line was not PAGE 4 Mr. DeMatheis stated that he wanted.the problem to be resolved and the findings put in writing so that at a later date the City would not change the paractice of treatment. In order to assure that the City and the School have the same understanding of the problem and the method of treatment the following issues were agreed to: FINDINGS 1. There is a grease buildup in the City's sewerline that the school's line flows into. 2. That the City and the school have agreed that the school will pretreat their waste with an approved enzme or bacteria based degreaser and that the -school will be allowed to discontinue the annual jetting of the sewer line between the building and the City's line. 3. That the City will provide a list of 4 or 5 products that will be acceptable for -use. 4. That the City will continue to clean the sewerline upto the manhole at the location of the school. 5. That in the future, if the City does any televising of sewerlines in the City that the line in question will be reviewed. 6. If it appears that repairs are needed on the line in question an access to the line will be installed. 7. That the records should note the if line appears to have any demage that it should be noted that there had been a break in the water line and the because of the time of the year improper compaction may have caused the problem. 8. If in the future, the line is replaced the City would still require the pretreatment be done. With an understanding of these agreements, the meeting was concluded. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 M ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 MARCH 2, 1988 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION OF FEES COLLECTED WITH BUILDING PERMITS 1. ALBERTVILLE'S SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (ASAC): This fee is collected when a building permit is issued and allows for a conncection to the sewer system. The fees collected pay for existing infrastructure (facilities) and any future improvements. 2. JOINT POWER'S WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (JPWA ): This fee is collected when a building permit is issued and allows for a connection to the water system. The fees are collected by the Joint Power's Board. A receipt showing payment thereof must be presented at the time a building permit is issued. Fees collected are used to retire debt incurred by the Joint Power's Board. 3. ALBERTVILLE'S WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (AWAC):This fee is collected by the City of Albertvill when a building permit is issued. The fees collected pays for the construction costs of City subtrunk water improvements (a line that is smaller than a trunk main but larger than a distribution main). 4. ALBERTVILLE'S SEWER CONNECTION CHARGE (ASCC): This fee is payable when a building permit is issued. The fee is paid by those properties benefited by the adjacent sewer mains which has not previously paid its pro -rate share of the cost of the improvement through or by special assessments and is calculated on a formula approved by the City Council. Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business PROVISION FOR PAYMENT ON AN INSTALLMENT METHOD: Upon written request by the owner, and approved thereof by the City, a method of payment has been developed and is available upon request. 5. ALBERTVILLE'S WATER CONNECTION CHARGE (AWCC): This fee is payable when a building permit is issued. The fee is paid by those properties benefited by the adjacent watermains which has not previously paid it pro-rata share of the cost of the improvement through or by special assessments and is calculated on a formula approved by the City Council. PROVISION FOR PAYMENT ON AN INSTALLMENT METHOD: Upon written request by the owner, and approved thereof by the City, a method of payment has been developed and is available upon request. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 1 711, PHONE: (612) 497-3384 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE 1988 PROPOSED CHARGES ALBERTVILLE"S SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (ALSAC) JOINT POWER'S WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (JPWAC) ALBERTVILLE'S WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (ALWAC) * ALBERTVILLE'S SEWER CONNECTION CHARGE (ALSCC) * ALBERTVILLE'S WATER CONNECTION CHARGE (ALWCC) BUILDING PERMIT PLUMBING FEE MECHANICAL FEE SITE FEE OTHER CHARGES $600.00 To be charged by the Joint Powers $100 - $200 $32.19/ft. $22.20/ft. $25.00 $25.00 $10.00 To be determined at the time the permit is drawn *These figures are based on the estimates presented in the feasibility reports approved by the Council on February 16, 1988, but will be firmed up once actual construction costs have been determined. Make our City ........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business fC AGREEMENT .DEVELOPER'S WESTWIND THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this ____ day of __-____-___, 1988, by and between �.. ______________________________, a Minnesota general partnership, referred to herein as "Developer"; and the CITY OF ALBERTVILLE, in the County of Wright, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Developer is the fee owner and developer of a parcel or parcels of land described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which parcel or parcels of land are proposed to be developed as a subdivision in the City, and which subdivision is intended to bear the name "Westwind" and may sometimes hereinafter be referred to as the "Subject Property"; and WHEREAS, the City has given final approval of Developer's plat of Westwind contingent upon compliance with certain City requirements including, but not limited to, matters set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the City requires that certain public improvements, which are herein referred to as "Petition Items" including, but not limited to, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and streets be installed to serve the Subject Property and other properties affected by the development of Developer's land, all at the expense of Developer; and WHEREAS, the City further requires that certain on and off -site improvements be installed by the Developer, within the -1- Subject Property, which improvements typically consist of boulevard sod, bituminous or concrete driveway approaches, drainage swales, monumentation, berming and front yard trees and the like items and which improvements to the Subject Property shall be referred to herein as "Escrow Items"; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is entered into for the purpose of setting forth and memorializing for the parties and subsequent owners the understandings and agreements of the parties concerning the development of the Subject Property; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AND HEREIN MUTUALLY AGREED, in consideration of each party's promises and considerations herein set forth, as follows: 1. PETITION FOR IMpgOVE;uEN / nc+mTmrr,., Developer herein petitions the City to construct as a part of the City's Improvement Project 1988-3 and/or any other City project deemed appropriate by the City the improvements referred to in Exhibit "B" and described therein in very generalized language as "Petition Items". Said Exhibit "B" is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth. 2. WAS. Developer waives all right to a 9 public hearing and other a statutory rights granted to a property owner under Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes as the said rights therein granted relate to Petition Items, including those that are a part of Project 1988-3, as set forth in Exhibit "B". 3. PETITION rT M,2 - PRnJ The City shall construct as part of its City Improvement Project 1988-3 at its discretion all or a portion of the Petition Items as shown on -2- Exhibit "B" pursuant to its regular methods of making public improvements. The Developer agrees that special assessments for said improvements may be levied by the City, without Developer's objection, after construction is commenced, and that the City may recover it$ costs and expenses (including legal, fiscal and engineering), said special assessments to be payable in equal installments together with interest thereon as determined by the City over a period of not more than twelve (12) years. 4. PFTITIQN ITEMS - SURETY. It is anticipated that the City's debt service each year during the referred assessment period for the installation of -the Petition Items as shown in Exhibit "B", that portion of which benefits Westwind will require an estimated payment from the City to its bondholders as indicated on Exhibit "Cu attached hereto. It is intended that Developer shall make sufficient payments of said special assessments that the City's cash flow will be unaffected by said improvement project. Developer herein agrees that said Developer will actually pay sufficient amounts of said special assessments each year, if not already paid in prior years, for properties lying within the plat of Westwind to enable the City to pay the required debt service payment shown on Exhibit "C" when due. To determine the actual amount, as opposed to the estimated amount, to be paid by the Developer, the principal amounts shall be added to the interest amounts, for the subject improvement project, as shown on the tax statements for lots lying within Westwind, less credit for prepayments made therefor. Any deficiencies in the amount -3- paid by the Developer for special assessments causing a shortage of funds with which the City may timely pay the required debt service payment shall be supplemented with funds withdrawn by the City from the Developer's corporate surety bond, approved letter of credit pr other surety furnished to the City. Any of said surety or guaranty of funds referred to herein that are withdrawn will be used by the City for payment of its herein referred debt service payment when due. Upon the Developer paying the delinquent special assessments, the City will repay to the surety, to the extent that the delinquent special assessments have been paid, the surety monies withdrawn, less any costs incurred by the City in conjunction with the said delinquent special assessments. The Developer shall provide the City with cash, corporate surety bond, approved letter of credit or other satisfactory surety in the amount of 60% of the estimated cost of Petition Item improvements which are to be constructed as part of Project 1988-3. The Developer's cash, bond, letter of credit or other surety shall thus be in the amount of $417,000.00, calculated as follows: Total estimated Cost of Westwind $695,470.84 Plat Petition Items included in Project 1988-3 X 60 % Surety Requirement: $417,282.00 USE: 417,000.00 The said 60% surety is the guarantee referred to earlier in this paragraph that sufficient revenue is annually produced by the payment of special assessments to enable the City to pay the required debt service payment, which debt service payment relates -4- to that portion of Project 1988-3 benefitting the Westwind development. The City may draw on said surety for cash flow purposes to supplement the Developer's payments when Developer is delinquent in the payment of said special assessments. 5. ON AND OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENTS/ESCROW ITEMS• SURETY. A. Developer shall perform all on and off -site improvements set forth on Exhibit "B" as "Escrow Items". Developer will provide the City with cash, corporate surety bond, approved letter of credit or other satisfactory surety in the sum Of $- r--J if the surety submitted is in the form of a bond, or $---------- if the surety submitted is in the form of cash or letter of credit, which figures represent 150% or 110%, respectively, of the estimated cost of said escrow items. The said surety shall be a guaranty to the City that with the exception of boulevard improvements (sod, trees and driveway approaches) the construction and completion of the escrow items by the Developer, to the City's satisfaction, will be completed on or before JJJJJJ--JJJJ--r-JJJJ. The boulevard improvements for each lot or parcel shall be completed to the City's satisfaction within sixty (60) days of the date that a certificate of occupancy (temporary or permanent) is issued by the City for a building located on the lot; unless the certificate of occupancy is issued after October 1st or before March 30th in any given year, in which case the boulevard improvements shall be so completed by the following June 1st. The said cash, corporate surety bond, letter of credit or other surety shall be released upon certification of the Engineer of -5- the City that such items are satisfactorily completed pursuant to this agreement. Periodically, as payments are made by the Developer for the completion of portions of the project described under "Escrow Items" and when it is reasonably prudent, the Developer day request of the City that the surety be reduced for that portion of the project which has been fully completed and payment made therefor. The City's cost for processing said reduction request shall be billed to the Developer at the rate of $30.00 per hour with a minimum of one (1) hour per reduction and shall be paid to the City within ten (10) days of the mailing of the billing., B. It is intended herein that the planting of the boulevard trees which are included in the escrow items shall be planted by the Developer in varieties as stated in the resolution approving the final plat of Westwind. In addition, Developer shall submit, if required by the City, and receive approval of a landscape plan prior to the plat being released for filing. The said landscape plan shall indicate the location and type of boulevard tree or trees to be planted on each lot. No more than 30% of the total trees planted may consist of one specific variety. 6. SURETY_REL.EASE_.- PETITIDN ITEMS. The developer may request of the City a reduction or release of any surety provided for in conjunction with the Petition Items as shown on Exhibit "B" as follows: A. When another acceptable surety is furnished to the City to replace a prior surety. B. When the final cost amount minus previous payments becomes less than the surety provided, thus allowing the surety to be reduced to a sum commensurate with the remaining debt service obligation. C. No reduction shall be made which would result in the surety held being less than 35% of the original surety for petition'items until the final costs are known and assessed. D. The surety will be released at such time as special assessments for ------ lots and -------------- multiple units in Westwind have been paid in full. The City's cost for processing said reduction request shall be billed at $30.00 per hour with a minimum of one (1) hour per reduction, and shall be billed to the Developer and paid to the City within ten (10) days thereof. 7. SURETY DEFICIENCY. In the event that any cash, corporate surety bond, letter of credit or other surety referred to herein is ever utilized and found to be deficient in amount to pay or reimburse the City in total as required herein, the Developer agrees that upon being billed. by the City, developer will pay within ten (10) days of the mailing of said billing, the said deficient amount. If there should be an overage in the amount of utilized security the City will, upon making said determination, refund to the Developer any monies which the City has in its possession which are in excess of the actual costs of the project as paid by the City. All monies deposited with the City shall be used by the City at the City's discretion to defray the City's costs and expenses connected with the project referred -7- to herein. event Developer should abandon the proposed development of the Subject Property, the City's costs and expenses for the preparatiop of the feasibility report, plans and specifications and all other costs expended by the City which are associated with Project 1988-3 shall be paid by said Developer. The Developer has provided cash sureties to the City as follows: PURPOSE AMOUNT Costs associated with preparation of feasibility report: $__.�J�_______ Costs associated with preparation of plans and specifications: + TOTAL: $____________ The City may withdraw funds from the above -referred escrow for the purpose of paying the costs referred to in this paragraph. The said cash escrow funds will be released by the City upon the Developer providing satisfactory sureties for the Petition Items referred to in Exhibit "B". 9. DEVEL•OPE TO pAv ALL COSTS. It is understood and agreed that amounts set forth in this Agreement as improvement costs, unless specifically specified as fixed amounts, are estimated. The Developer agrees to pay the entire cost of the improvement including interest, fiscal, engineering and legal charges. A. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE. Before any grading is started on any site, all erosion control measures as show:l on the approved erosion control plan shall be installed. In addition, a financial guarantee shall be provided to the City to insure compliance during construction. This financial guarantee, which is included as an Escrow Item in Exhibit "B", will not be returned uptil all disturbed areas have permanent vegetation re-established. B. • EROS_rON._CONTR_OL. The Developer shall be responsible for compliance with the approved erosion control plan. The Developer will be given a telephone notice when an unsatisfactory condition exists that is determined to be a Developer's responsibility. Work to correct said unsatisfactory condition shall commence within 48 hours from the time of the telephone notice. If work is not commenced within 48 hours of said telephone notice, the City will proceed to do the required work at the expense of the Developer. If, it is determined that the unsatisfactory condition could result in degradation of downstream water quality, the Developer shall, upon telephone notice, immediately proceed to correct said unsatisfactory condition. If the Developer does not immediately respond to said unsatisfactory condition, the City has the right to enter upon the property and correct said condition. The City shall be entitled to all of its costs and expenses including but not limited to legal, fiscal and engineering. The City may at its option invoice the said costs for direct payment from the Developer or to proceed to draw on the Developer's financial guarantee. 11. PARK.DEDICATION. The Developer shall fulfill park dedication requirements of the Albertville City Ordinance Code and the Albertville Park and Recreation Board by payment of cash in the sum of $----------- and conveyance of 14.2 acres which sum shall be paid prior to the final plat being released for filing at the Wright County Court House and the instrument of conveyance shall be delivered prior to said release. further the agreement of the parties that all special assessments levied on City Project 1988-3 or any other City project previously levied, or to be levied as a part of activating previously deferred assessments against the Subject Property, or portion thereof, if not paid prior thereto, shall be paid by the Developer on the sale or transfer of any fee ownership interest in the Subject Property. If only a portion of the Subject Property is transferred, Developer shall pay the said special assessments attributable only to that portion which is being sold or transferred. In the event the Developer wishes to have the final costs for Project No. 1988-3 determined for the purpose of conveying a lot or a number of lots prior to completion of the project, Developer shall provide to the City a cash payment in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated special assessments for each of the lots that the Developer seeks to convey. The surety deposit made by the Developer for Petition Items pursuant to this agreement shall be retained in full until the final project costs and results of the assessments are determined. The City, upon receipt of said payment for a -10- _ particular lot or lots will upon request then certify within any special assessment search relating to said lot or lots that such lot or lots have been fully assessed for said Project, pursuant to this Developer's Agreement; and that no further assessments will be mao.e to said lot or lots for the improvements comprehended or being constructed under Project No. 1988-3. After determination of the final cost of the project and the resulting assessment therefor, any overage paid by the Developer will be returned to the Developer, and if there should be any shortage in the amount paid, the Developer will immediately pay the City the difference between the amount previously paid and the amount of the assessments for the particular lot or lots. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of the billing. The City may draw upon any surety deposit made by the Developer if the Developer fails to pay the billed amount within thirty (30) days of said bill. 13. MAINTAIN PLt$LIC pROPERTy LLAMAGEp ()R C nTTERED DURING CONSTRUCTT.QN. Developer agrees to assume full financial responsibility for any damage which may occur to public property including but not limited to streets, street sub -base, base, bituminous surface, curb, utility system including but not limited to water main, sanitary sewer or storm sewer when said damage occurs as a result of the activity which takes place during the development of Westwind. The Developer further agrees to pay all costs required to repair the streets and/or utility systems damaged or cluttered with debris when occurring as a direct or indirect result of the construction that takes place in -11- Westwind. In the event the Developer fails to maintain or repair the damaged public property referred to aforesaid, the City may undertake making or causing it to be repaired or maintained. When the City undertakes such repair, the Developer shall reimburse Phe City for all of its expenses within ten (10) days of its billing to the Developer. If the Developer fails to pay said bill• within thirty (30) days, the surety shall be responsible for reimbursing the City therefor. 14. ROAD .CONSTRCCTIDN. While the development site is being graded, an independent testing firm, approved by the City, shall test the street section and fill areas so as to certify to the City that the contractor is achieving 95% of the standard moisture density relationship of soils with exception of the top three (3) feet of the street section. The top three (3) feet of the street section shall be compacted to 100% density. Fees paid to the said independent testing firm performing such testing process shall be paid by the Developer. The City of Albertville Engineer shall be furnished, either directly by the testing firm or by the Developer, a copy of the test reports. 15. TEMPQgARy EASEMENT RIGHT Tn INSTALL IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer by signing this Agreement, gives the City right of access on all of the Subject Property to install the contemplated utility and street improvements referred to herein. It is anticipated that the Developer will file the plat of Westwind on or before January 31, 1989, which plat will permanently provide right-of-way for the required streets and utilities. -12- 16. MTS('ELLAhTEDJUS. A. The Developer will construct a *berm, including trees thereon, in accordance with the approved landscape plan. The Developer will prepare or cause to be prepared a covenant, which covenant shall be filed with the Wright County Recorder after it has received approval in writing from the City Attorney and which covenant shall establish the berm and provide that it shall be maintained at all times by the affected lot owners in the plat in a condition at all times satisfactory to the City. The said covenant shall further provide that, upon a failure of the said affected lot owners to maintain the said berm and trees, the City may immediately go upon the said affected lots over and across the utility and drainage easement area dedicated in the plat of Westwind, and maintain the said berms and trees. If the City does so perform said maintenance, the City shall be entitled to improve or maintain them to the City's satisfaction and to then assess the costs thereof to all of the affected lots in Westwind. The said assessment shall be payable in one (1) year. B. The Developer shall pay to the City the fees established for water and sewer connection charges, which fee shall be paid prior to the final plat being released for filing at the Wright County Recorder's Office; provided, however, that the Developer may elect to pay such fees by the installment method over a period of five (5) years, upon approval of said method by the City Council. In such event the Developer shall execute the appropriate form furnished by the City setting forth the terms of installment payment, which shall include interest at -13- a rate not less than 8.75% per annum on deferred amounts. The Developer shall provide the City with cash, corporate surety bond, approved letter of credit or other satisfactory surety in the amount of 60% of the total amount of the fees provided above. Developer's cash, bond, letter of credit or other surety shall thus be in the amount of $---- calculated as follows: Albertville Sewer Connection Charge $--__--____-_ Albertville Water Connection Charge $___-________ Subtotal $____________ X 60 % Surety Requirement: $_-___-_-_--_ Use. $ The said 60% surety is to guarantee that sufficient revenues are annually produced by the payment of connection charges to enable the City to pay the required debt service payment, which debt service payment relate to costs that are financed by the said connection charges so the City may draw on said surety for cash -flow purposes to supplement the Developer's payment when Developer is delinquent in the payment of said connection charges. The surety shall be subject to the release and deficiency provisions as provided in paragraphs 6 and 7 above for "Petition Items". surety or other form of guarantee referred to herein is in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, which by its terms will become null and void prior to the time at which all money or obligation of the Developer is paid or completed, it is agreed that the Developer shall provide the City with a new letter of credit or other surety, acceptable to the City, at least thirty -14- (30) days prior to the expiration of the said expiring letter of credit. If a new letter of credit is not received as required above, the City may declare a default in the terms of this Agreement and thence draw in part or in total, at the City's discretion; upon the expiring letter of credit to avoid the loss of surety for the continued obligation. 18.'VIOLATION aF AGREEMENT. In the event that the Developer, its successors or assigns violates any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the City is hereby granted the right and privilege to declare all of the entire sums levied as taxes or otherwise and any deficiencies governed by this Agreement due and payable to the City in full. The City may thence immediately and without notice or consent of the Developer use all of the deposited escrow funds, corporate surety funds, letter of credit or other surety funds to complete the Developer's obligations as set forth herein, whether related to Escrow Items or Petition Items, and to bring legal action against the Developer to collect any sums due the City pursuant to this agreement. 19. ATTIIRNEY_'_G FEES. The Developer will pay the City reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed by the Court in the event a suit or action is brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement or in the event an action is brought upon a bond or letter of credit furnished by the Developer as provided herein. 20. NOTIFICATION INFORMATION. Any notices to the parties -15- herein shall be by registered mail addressed as follows: City of Albertville c/o City Administrator/Clerk Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 Telephone: (612) 497-3384 7761 N.E. River Road Elk River, MN 55330 Telephone: (612)--------- 21. AGREEMENT EFFECT. This Agreement shall be binding upon and extend to the representatives, heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE By---------------------------- Its Mayor Its Administrator/Clerk .J J----------------------------- A Partner A _.P-a--rtner--- --------------------- Pa -16- _ STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF --------) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this dayof ........... 19-- by ----------------------------- the Mayor and by ---------------------------- the Administrator/Clerk of the City of Albertville, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of said corporation. rJ--J--r-J�- ------------------------ Notary Public, ___ ------- County, MN My commission expires: ------------- STATE OF MINNESOTA) )SS COUNTY OF -) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of __________, 19 b and by ....... the Partners of -•----------------------------- a general partnership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of said general partnership. �- - - - -- - - - ------------------------- Notary Public, .......... County, MN My commission expires:______ THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Robert J. Miller Law Offices, P.A. 9405 - 36th Avenue North New Hope, MN 55427 (612) 542-3030 -17- 1W.4-.94:90 Legal Description for WESTWIND M.. WORK PERTAINING TO WESTWIND I. PETITION ITEMS (Project 1988-3) Estimated Cost A. Street $299,262.50 B. Storm Sewer 79,355.00 C. Sanitary Sewer 127,102.50 D. Watermain 167,580.70 E. Common Excavation 22,170.14 Required Surety Percentage: $695,470.8460 $ $417,282.56 USE: $417,000.00 • ' _V • p . . - u - • 1. Installation of boulevard sod. 2. Planting of one (1) deciduous front yard tree of type specified in City Resolution Approving Final Plat for each lot which shall be a minimum of two inches (2") in diameter measured six inches (6") above the ground. 3. Installation of a bituminous driveway approach with a minimum of two inches (2") hot mix a.c. on five inches (5") Class 5 aggregate or a concrete approach constructed a minimum of four inches (4") thick with wire mesh or six inches (6") thick without wire mesh. All site grading, including building sites, ponds and surface drainage ways shall be graded in accordance with the approved grading and development plan. Erosion control as designated in the erosion control plan approved by the City Engineer. C. Monumen atinn. Install ........ ( approved cast iron block monuments placed at locations as designated by the City Engineer in addition to the individual lot stakes. D. Street (leaning. All streets in the area shall be kept free of dirt and debris during all phases of construction. SURETYREOUTREMENT : If caph or a letter of credit is submitted If a bond is submitted III . FEE -FOR _nNN .C'TTnj`CHARGES: Albertville Sewer Connection Charge Albertville Water Connection Charge Required surety percentages: USE: $----- ------ $------------- T------------- $------------- X 60 % $------------- $------------- EXHIBIT "_C" DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE WESTWIND Debt service based on total estimated project cost of $695,470.84, 12-year assessment and an estimated 8.75% interest rate. REQUIRED SPEC. ASSESS. TOTAL PAY. BY DEV. PRINCIPAL ANNUAL DEBT IN TAXES OR BY .BALANCE, PRINCIPAL INTEREST SERVICE PREPAYMENT_. i7AT AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES This agreement, made this 1st day of July, 1987, by and between the City of Monticello, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Dave Stromberg, an individual (hereinafter referred to as Stromberg), sets out terms and conditions for the general purpose of providing animal control to the residents of the City. WHEREAS, the City has a duly adopted ordinance regulating animal control, and WHEREAS, enforcement of said ordinance cannot be restricted to standard employee scheduling procedures, and WHEREAS, the City desires to provide such enforcement through the services of a private party which will be able to respond as needed, under the general guidelines provided by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, in and for consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: 1. a. The City, in and for consideration of the sum of Six Hundred Four Dollars and 00/100 ($604.00) per month payable on the last business day of each month, hereby contracts with Stromberg for the period of twelve (12) months from the date of execiltion of this agreement for the services of Stromberg as Animal Control Officer. 1. b. Effective January 1, 1988, the City agrees to compensate Stromberg monthly an additional fee of $4.00 per animal disposed of through the Humane Society and $10.00 per animal disposed of through direct adoption procedures. ..: � Agreement for Services Dave Stromberg Page 2 M1, 2. Stromberg hereby agrees to perform substantially the following services as Animal Control Officer: a. Provides prompt, timely response to animal calls (complaints, reports of loose animals). b. Maintains and enforces security measures as prescribed by City Administrator, Public Works Director, and/or Superintendent of Wastewater Treatment Facility. c. Conducts random patrol runs at own discretion but within prescribed limits set by City Administrator. d. Monitors care of kennels and animals. e. Conducts periodic observation of animals in impound for sickness, injury, etc. f. Promptly notifies an animal health professional when an animal is determined to be distressed. g. Serves as regular attendant of impound facility during "Public Hours," said hours to be determined by City Administrator. h. Provides timely response to requests to reclaim animals from and/or impound animals at the facility other than during "Public Hours." (It is considered reasonable to respond to routine calls between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily. Emergency calls can be expected to occur outside these hours.) Although timely telephone response to pager calls are expected on Sunday, both parties agree that patrol services on this day may be limited to urgent and/or emergency calls. i. Exercises care to ensure the humane treatment of animals both in transport and during impoundment. j. Ensures collection of fines and impound fees prior to release of animals. k. Maintains accurate, current records for each animal. 1. Maintains orderly records filing systems for easy retrieval of information. m. Promptly transports unclaimed and/or severely distressed and suffering animals to euthanization facility. Agreement for Services nerve Stromberg ge 3 n. Makes timely submittal of logs and records to the City Finance Director. o. Provides animals with fresh food and water each afternoon. p. Conducts cursory cleaning (waste removal, etc.) as needed, each afternoon. q. Maintains and submits on a monthly basis a complete record of animals adopted which includes an approved "Release Form" signed by the adopting party. 3. Stromberg hereby agrees to provide service seven (7) days per week. If Stromberg cannot be on call for any period of time, Stromberg hereby agrees to provide and pay for an approved replacement during such period. 4. Stromberg hereby agrees to utilize his/her own vehicle to perform the aforementioned tasks, and further, to provide proper insurance coverage to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claims or violations arising from the operation of said vehicle (Certificate of Insurance to be provided to City.) The City agrees to pay mileage to and from veterinary clinics outside the City of Monticello when approved by the City Administrator. The payment shall be at $0.25 per mile. 5. The City hereby agrees to provide and maintain appropriate insurance coverage for all City owned facilities and for all claims arising from charges of neglect or inhumane treatment of animals, provided that Stromberg, as Animal Control Officer, observes and exercises all proper means of fulfilling the duties herein stated. Agreement for Services Dave Stromberg Page 4 6. The City hereby agrees to assume the cost of animal food and incidental health supplies and pound maintenance supplies and operating equipment. 7. The City hereby agrees to perform or have performed all essential maintenance tasks that lie beyond the scope of the duties outlined herein or as can be reasonably expected as routine custodial maintenance. 8. It is hereby agreed by both parties that this agreement may be terminated at any time, by either party, with or without any reason, provided that the party wishing to terminate this agreement shall r-- provide written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of the termination. This agreement shall run for the period first stipulated above, and shall automatically renew itself for a like period unless a thirty (30) day written notice is given that one of the parties hereto desires to engage in discussion concerning the terms and conditions stated herein. WOO Agreement for Services Dave Stromberg Page 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed in their behalf by themselves and/or their proper officers by their signatures the day and year first written above. Witness F MONTICELLO City Admini' rator /Z �1�1-7 Date ' INDIVIDU io Date