Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19830919_regularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 19, 1983 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney. 77 d- cn i\ 0 5 tn MINUTES of the Regular Council Meeting of September 12, 1983, were approved as submitted by motion of Member Schmidt, seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED ON NUMEROUS ASSESSMENTS. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Due notice having been given, public hearings were conducted and action taken as herein- after recorded on the following proposed assessments: 1. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-346 2. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-137 3. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-361 4. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-169 Improvements listed under 1, 2, 3 and 4 above affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM-346 showing total construction cost of $42,357.28, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $3,025.52 each, against esti- mated assessment of $3,576.66 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improve- ment No. C-137 was given as total construction cost of $29,684.20, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $2,120.30 each, against estimated assessment of $2,095.56 per lot. No. SS-361 was given as total construction cost of $27,905.64, proposed to be 'assessed against 14 assessable lots at $1,993.26 each, against estimated assessment of $2,839.54 per lot. was given as total construction cost of $20,722.66, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $1,480.19 each, against estimated assessment of $1,596.89 per lot. Mr. Hoffman advised that the improvements were constructed pursuant to Deve- loper's Agreement. No objections were heard and no written objections to the pro- posed assessments were received prior hereto. later in Minutes.) Location: Nob Hill Road in Oak Ridge of Edina Addition Location: Nob Hill Drive and easement line to pond in Oak Ridge of Edina Location: Easement line from Danen's Drive to Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina Location: Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina Addition Location: Gleason Court from Gleason Rd to Vernon Court Location: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition Location: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition Location: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S-169, (Assessments levied by Resolution 5. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-347 6. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-170 7. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-362 8. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-138 Improvements listed under 5, 6, 7 and 8 above affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM-347 showing total construction cost of $18,948.20, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $1,894.82 each, against estimated assessment of $1,283.48 per lot. Improvement No. St.S-170 was given as total construction cost of $15,487.30, pro- posed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $1,548.73 each, against estimated assessment of $1,543.16 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improve- ment No. SS-362 was given as total construction cost of $57,064.40, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $5,706.44 each, against estimated assessment of $5,725.36 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C-138 was given as total construction cost of $12,288.69, proposed to be assessed against 9 assessable lots at $1,365.41 each, against estimated assessment of $1,397.46 per lot. Mr. Hoffman stated that the improvements were constructed pursuant to Deve- Loper's Agreement. No objections were heard and no written objections to the pro- posed assessments were received prior hereto. (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer 9. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-348 Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West Location: Parklawn Avenue from 150 feet West of York Avenue to 420 feet West of York Avenue Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 670 feet West Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West ' 10. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-363 11. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-22 12. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-139 9 I19 I83 ~- 78 13. STREET IEPROVENENT NO. BA-253 . ~. Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West Improvements listed under 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. for Watermain Improvement No. \?M-348 showing total construction cost of $20,511.04, proposed to be assessed against 2 assessable lots at $10,255.52 each, against esti- mated assessment of $9,452.79 per lot. Improvement No. SS-363 was given as total construction cost of $10,653.68, proposed to be assessed against 2 assessable lots at $5,326.84 each, against estimated assess- ment of $4,817.98 per lot. No. L-22 was given as total construction cost of $9,420.27, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $11.18 per foot against estimated assessment of $13.34 per foot. as total construction cost of $14,821.33, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $17.59 per foot against estimated assessment of $12.56 per foot. Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-253 was given as total construc- tion cost of $55,653.73, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $66.05 per foot against estimated assessment of $118.49 per foot. were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessments were received prior hereto. 14. GRADING IN!?ROVEMENT NO. C-136 15. STREET IEPROVEJCENT NO. BA-252 Improvements listed under 14 and 15 affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C-136 showing total construction cost of $10,238.08, proposed to be assessed against 8 assessable lots at $1,279.76 each,.against-estimated assessmentzdf $1,520.65 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-252 was given as total construction cost of $22,394.88, proposed to be assessed against 8 assessable lots at $2,799.36 each, against estimated assessment of $2,215.04 per lot. man advised that the grading improvement was constructed pursuant to Developer's Agreement. ments were received prior hereto. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Analysis of Assessment for Street Lighting Improvement I Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C-139 was given -. No objections (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Efinutes.) Location: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition Location: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition Mr. Hoff- No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assess- (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 16. STREET IMPROVEEENT NO. BA-248 Location: Grove Street from Johnson Drive to MN&S Railaroad U. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-248 showing total construction cost of $76,946.39, proposed to be assessed against 1,761.19 assess- able feet at $43.69 per foot against estimated assessment of $37.69 per foot. objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were- received prior hereto. No (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 17. STREET IMPROYEPENT NO. BA-250 Location: Dewey Hill Road from Cahill Road 'Westerly to Delaney Boulevard Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-250 showing total construction cost of $12,024.32 able feet at $33.00 per foot against estimated assessment of $33.00 per foot. Mr. Hoffman explained that State Aid funds of $152,217.40 were allocated to this project. ments were received prior hereto. proposed to be assessed against 364.4 assess- No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assess- ,(Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 18. STREET IMPROTFElENT NO. BA-251 Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-251 showing total construction cost of $38,181.00, proposed to be assessed against 11 assessable lots at $3,471.00 each, against estimated assessment of $4,076.23 per lot. No object- ions were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) Location: Fox Meadow Lane and Evanswood Lane in Oak Ponds of Interlachen Addn. 19. STREET IMPROVEElENT NO. BA-255 Location: Cahill Road from Amundson Avenue to 300 feet f South Mr . Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA-255 showing total construction cost of $46,443.38, proposed to be assessed against 580.76 assess- able feet at $79.97 per foot against estimated assessment of $73.83 per foot. Mr. Hoff man advised that a letter had been received from Henry Hyatt, of Crossroads Develop- ment Corporation, regarding the proposed assessment against the Oak Glen property in which he requested that the special assessment be paid from Community Development fund, inasmuch as the Oak Glen project is a low and moderate income rental development. special assessment would result in a financial burden to the residents of Oak Glen since it must eventually be passed to the residents in the form of higher rents. was suggested by Mr. Hoffman that the matter be continued to the next meeting so that staff could review the cost figures for this construction project. -Turner was seconded by Member Bredesen, continuing the hearing until October 3, 1983, so that the cost figures could be reviewed. E The It Motion of Member 20. STORM SEWER IEIPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-171 Location: West 52nd Street from Halifax Avenue to 377 feet east . 9/39/83 I, ti cn r- Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St .'S-m, showing total construction cost of $38,151.75, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot at $32,622.00 against estimated assessment of $51,752.33 minus $7,500.00 (City's share for street portion of the project). heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment was received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) No objections were 21. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-365 Location: Sewer extension for 6610 and 6620 Normandale Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-365 showing total construction cost of $12,327.70, proposed to be assessed against two assessable lots at $6,163.85 each, against estimated assessment of $6,048.24 per lot. tion of the project. posed assessment were received prior hereto. in Minutes.) 22. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-23 Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Lighting Improvement No. L-23, showing total construction cost of $1,898.80, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $189.88 each, against estimated assessment of $240.09 per lot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. 23. PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P-13 Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Parking Lot Improvement No. P-13, showing total construction cost of $110,031.54, proposed to be assessed against the Edina School District No. 273 at $84,838.55, with the City's participation at $25,192.99. ing, clerical and interest costs. In response to a question from the audience as to why the City was participating in the cost of the project, Member Turner recalled that when this project was proposed and the City was asked to participate, the Human Relations Commission (HRC) was asked to look at the Community Center's uses. a broad range of people from the community in addition to the tenants and also, that a number of the City's Park and Recreation programs are held there. This was the rationale for the City's participation in the project. heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. Mr. Hoffman advised that the property owners had petitioned for construc- No objections were heard and no written objections to the pro- (Assessment levied by Resolution later Location: Knoll Drive from Schaefer Road to Parkwood Road (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) Location: Edina Community Center at South View Lane and Highway 100 Mr. Hoffman explained that the City's share consisted of engineer- A study made by the HRC had determined that the facility was being used by No objections were (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 24. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S-31 Location: Colonial Way from Olinger Blvd to 206 feet West of the East line of Lot 1, Block 2, Colonial Church of Edina First Addition. (West side only.) Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sidewalk Improvement No. S-31 showing total construction cost of $21,576.90, proposed to be assessed against one lot at $21,576.90 against estimated assessment of $21,583.99. Mr. Hoffman advised that this project was petitioned for by Colonial Church. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 25. AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ-83 Location: Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond Area Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ;83., showing- total construction cost of $6,749.94, proposed to be assessed against 63 assessable lots at $107.14 per lot against estimated assessment of $109.38 per lot. Mr. Hoffman presented a graphic outlining the-special assessment district-which- showed the benefitted properties. Mr. Hughes advised that he had received a letter from Rodney D. Hardy, 4506 Browndale Avenue, requesting that the City consider providing more permanent access points for the weed removal to avoid cutting up Browndale Park. assessment were received prior hereto. Minutes. ) No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed (Assessment levied by Resolution later in 26. MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-83 Location: 50th Street and France Avenue Business District Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Maintenance Improvement No. M-83, showing total assessment cost of $31,504.27, proposed to be assessed against 289,030 assessable square feet at $0.109 per square foot against estimated assess- ment of $0.10 per square foot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. Resolution later in Minutes.) (Assessment levied by 27. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-6 Location: 4362 Vernon Avenue South Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC-6 showing total assessable cost at $2,600.00, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) No objections were heard and none had been received prior 9/19/83 28. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-7 Location: 6932 Valley View Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC-7 showing total assessable cost at $2,355.30, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. hereto. No objections were heard and none had been received prior (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 29. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-8 Location: 4003 Sunnyside Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC-8 showing total assessable cost at $4,074.30, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. hereto. Following presentation of Analysis of Assessments, Member Schmidt offered the fol- lowing resolution and moved its adoption: I No objections were heard and none had been received prior __ (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVENENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. ment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such hearings held on September 19, 1983, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessments. 2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvements: The City has-given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed assess- Watermain Improvements Nos. WM-347, WM-347 and WN-348 Sanitary Sewer Improvements Nos. SS-361, SS-362, SS-363 and SS-365 Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. ST.S-169, ST.S-170 and ST.S-171 Grading Improvement Nos. C-137, C-137, C-138 and C-139 Street Improvements Nos. BA-248, BA-250, BA-251, BA-252, BA-253 and BA-255 Street Lighting Improvement Nos. L-22 and L-23 Sidewalk Improvement No. S-31 Parking Improvement No. P-13 Maintenance Improvement No. M-83 Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ-83 Sanitary Sewer House Connections Nos. HC-6, HC-7 and HC-8 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements upon the lot, tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on account of said respective improvements to be spread against the benef5ted lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 7% per annum for all Sanitary entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1984, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1984. follows : -Sewer House Connections and 11% per annum for all remaining improvements, on the The number of such annual installments shall be as Name of Improvement WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. TJM-346 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-137 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-361 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-169 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. T@i-347 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-170 SANITARY SE'NFR IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-362 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-138 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. TJM-348 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-363 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-22 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-139 STREET IMPROVEPENT NO. BA-253 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-136 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-252 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-248 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-250 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-251 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-255 STORM SEWER IPIPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-171 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-365 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEFENT NO. L-23 PARKING LOT IMPROVEEENT NO. P-13 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S-31 AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ-83 MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. $1-83 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-6 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-7 SA?KCTARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC-8 Number of Installments 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 1 Year 1 Year 6 Years 6 Years 6 Years 9/19/83 4. of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right-of-way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429,061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy The Clerk shal1,also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-351 AUTHORIZED ON 100% PETITION. Mr. Hoffman reported that a petition for Watermain Extension had been received in his office on September 8, 1983, for 5400, 5406 and 5408 York Avenue and that said petition also requested the Council to assess the entire cost against the property owner. He added that a letter had been received dated September 16, 1983, from the petitioner, Rebecca M. Speakes, stating that she was the sole owner of these properties and that she waived her right to public hearing-and appeal to the proposed assessment. Mr. Hoffman presented esti- mate of cost of construction at $4,832.83, proposed to be assessed against 3 assess- able lots at an estimated cost of $1,510.94 per lot. the following resolution and moved its adoption: UPON PETITION THEREFOR Member Schmidt thereupon offered RESOLUTION ORDERING WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-351 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that a petition has been filed requesting the Council to construct a watermain extension improvement to serve 5400, 5406 and 5408 York Avenue and to assess the entire cost against the property of the petitioner, and that said petition has been signed by the sole owner of the real property which will abut and be assessed for the improvement. 2. The making of said improvement in accordance with said petition is hereby ordered pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.031 (3), (Session Laws of 1961, Chapter 525, Section 2). Said improvement is hereby designated and shall be referred to in all subsequent proceedings as WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-351. The entire cost of said improvement is hereby ordered to be assessed against the said properties on York Avenue where said improvement is to be located. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. , Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. GILBERT PETERSON COMMENDED FOR YEARS OF SERVICE. City Manager Rosland introduced Gilbert Peterson and commended him for his years of service to the City as Public Works Administrative Assistant. He noted that Mr. Peterson started.his employment with the City in December of 1956, lefttduring the years of 1969 to 1973, and that he again was rehired for the same position where he has been a dedicated employee. He was presented with a silver pen bearing the Edina Logo and was congratulated by members of the Council for his faithful service. _____-~~ JOHNSON BUILDING COMPANY/EDINA MILLS REZONING TO PRD-2 AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED. Affidavit of Notice was presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. rezoning from R-1 Single Family District to PRD-2 Planned Residential District and for preliminary plat approval for property generally described as Lots 1 and 2, Auditors Subdivision 172 (4600 France Avenue). He recalled that Council granted First Reading of Ordinance No. 811-A171 for PRD-2 rezoning on February 28, 1983, to allow construction of a seven unit townhouse on the site. now returned with an overall development plan which includes a site plan, landscape *plan, grading plan and utility layout,and building elevations. A preliminary plat has also been submitted. Staff had noted two concerns: 1) the utility plans sub- mitted do not adequately address storm water drainage and staff had requested that a drainage plan be submitted which has now been approved, and 2) the proposed land- scaping relies heavily on retaining existing trees on the site and staff has re- quested the landscape plan be revised to identify the trees as to type, location and size. Approval of the overall development plan and preliminary plat were re- commended by the Community Development and Planning commission at its August 31, 1983 meeting subject to resolution of staff's concerns and conditioned upon final platting, subdivision dedication and approval of sewer and water plans by the City of Minneapolis which will serve this project with these utilities. stated that Mike Klein, representing Johnson Building Company, was present to answer any questions. No. 811-A171 for Second Reading and moved its adoption as follows, subject to staff conditions as stated: Mr. Hughes presented the request of Johnson Building Company for final The proponents have Mr. Hughes No one appearing to be heard, Member Bredesen offered Ordinance 9/19/83 ORDINANCE NO. 811-A171 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (N0.811) BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PRD-2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESImIAT, DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA. NINNESOTA. ORDAINS: Section 1. "The extent of the Planned Residential District (Sub-District PRD-2) is Paragraph-4 of SectiiSn 5 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is enlarged by adding the following thereto: enlarged by the addition of the following property: Lots 1 and 2, Auditors Subdivision 172." Sec. 2. and publication. Motion for adoption of the Ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. ATTEST : --&La.&%. &d.f-- City Clerk Member Bredesen then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR EDINA MILLS BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that that certain plat known as Edina Mills, platted by Johnson Building Company, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 19, 1983, be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval-conditioned on subdivision dedication. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. BRAEMAR ASSOCIATES/KLODT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY REQUEST FOR PRD-3 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVED. approved as to form and ordered placed on file. subject property, located in the northwest quadrant of TJ. 78th Street and Cahill Road, was granted final rezoning to PRD-3 several years ago and an 89-unit condo- minium plan for the site was approved. On April 18, 1983, the owners requested an amendment of the approved plan in order to replace five condominium buildings originally anticipated for the easterly portion of the site with two condominium buildings. It was proposed that the westerly portion of the site would remain as previously proposed with three buildings containing a total of 35 units, and that plan amendment was approved by Council. now returned requesting a similar plan amendment for the westerly portion of the site. The request is to replace the three buildings with 5 townhouse clusters - containing 29 units, which is six fewer than were originally proposed. unizs would be transferred over to the two buildings on the easterly portion of the site, increasing the number of units from 27 to 30 units in each building in order to maintain the original approval which was for 89 units on the site. The proponents have submitted landscape plans and elevation drawings showing three story buildings with underground parking on the easterly portion and two story townhouses on the westerly portion. garages, however, due to the topography some units would have the garages at first level. Mr. Hughes pointed out that some of the units proposed for the condominium bufldings are small, particularly the efficiency units which are 525 square feet in size and the one bedroom units which measure 760 square feet; however, they do meet the minimum zoning ordinance requirements. and Planning Commission recommended approval of the plan amendment conditioned upon: 1) A developer's agreement covering utilities in the townhouse development, 2) revision of the final plat to reflect the townhouse subdivision of the westerly one-half of the site, 3) modification of the access drives to the townhouses, and 4) increase of size classificaton for shademaster locust to 2 1/2 inches. Klodt, Klodt Construction Company, was present and answered questions of William Harrison, Board of Directors of Windwood Condominiums and Dominic Sciola, 7705 Glasglow Drive, stating that the units would be for sale, not rental; there would be no discrimination regarding pets and children; that the parking lots would be screened and that there would be two driveway exists on Delaney Boulevard. response to Mr. Sciola's concern about the additional traffic this project would generate, Mr. Hoffman responded that it would not add significantly to the traffic now using West 78th Street. motion was seconded by Member Bredesen, for approval of the PRD-3 Planned Resi- dential District Plan Amendment request, subject to conditions outlined by staff. Affidavit of Notice was presented by Clerk, Mr. Hughes recalled that the Mr. Hughes explained that the owners have Those six The townhouses would mainly have tuck-under The Community Development Paul In . No further comments being heard, Member Richards' Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. I I 9/19 /83 83 REZONING REQUEST OF JOHNSON BUILDING COMPANY FOR C-2 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO PRDz5- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (5212 VERNON AV.) CONTINUED TO 11/7/83. Affidavit of Notice was presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Hughes presented the request of Johnson Building Company for rezoning from C-2 Commercial District to PRD-5 Planned Residential District for property generally located west of Vernon Avenue and south of West 52nd Street (5212 Vernon Avenue), advising that the subject property measures 3.3 acres in area and is the present site of the Biltmore Motel. The property presently is zoned C-2 Commercial District. Adjoining the property to the west are six double bungalows, across the street to the north is a double bungalow and a four unit building, across the street to the south is a 60-unit apartment building (24 units/acre) and across the street to the east is Jerry's shopping area. to PRD-5 Planned Residential District to construct an 84-unit condominium building on the site which equates to 24 units per acre. The proposed building is four stories in height above an underbuilding parking garage. building parking spaces and .6 surface spaces per dwelling unit are proposed to meet ordinance requirements. The proposed building for the site appears to meet ordinance requirements in terms of setback, height, etc. with the exception of the surface parking in the front yard setback. Mr. Hughes stated that in connection with the rezoning, the proponents are also requesting the vacation of a portion of the right of way adjacent to Vernon Avenue. That right of way was originally pro- vided for a service drive which was never constructed and this vacation would add about 9,000 square feet to the site. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for Mixed Uses (office, multiple residential and accessory commercial uses) and also encourages the reuse of commercial buildings for multiple residential purposes, particularly within the Grandview commercial area. reviewed by the Community Development and Planning Commission at its August 31, 1983 meeting. The Commission felt that the land use proposed was excellent. However, after hearing testimony from the surrounding property owners that there was a traffic related concern associated with Vernon Avenue as well as some of the side streets in that traffic from this development would shortcut by way of those streets to Inter- lachen Boulevard to avoid congestion on Vernon Avenue, the Commission felt that potential did exist but it was a potential regardless of the development of the site. The Commission recommended preliminary rezoning be granted but that Council should consider authorizing a traffic study of the Grandview area in general. noted that staff felt the size and mass of the building was appropriate, but that the lot coverage would be 5mproved if reduced to 25% from the 28% proposed. This could be achieved by reduction of unit sizes'or by consideration of a five story height for the building. Johnson Building Company, were present to answer questions. prior to review of the proposed project by the Planning Commission, they had met with the neighbors who had voiced their opinions very strongly about traffic problems in the area. He added that subsequently to that meeting, the project plan was redrawn to respond to those concerns, and that Johnson Building Company is willing to follow the direction of the City in relationship to the traffic problems. Persons appear- ing to express their concern over the traffic which would be generated by the pro- posed project were: Robert Bryant, 5101 William Avenue, Michael Seiwert, 5224 51st Street West, Nancy Wilbur, 5100 Bedford Avenue, Jeff Anderson, 5124 William Avenue, Floyd Johnson, 5137 William Avenue, James Nelson, 5132 William Avenue and George Frey, 5222 Grandview Lane, who stated there already is a traffic problem on Vernon Avenue and that he hoped the proposed project would be approved. Mayor Courtney asked if there was a traffic problem at the present time on Vernon Avenue in that area. Engineer Hoffman responded that there was and the City should look at the entire Grand View area, especially keeping in mind possible developments or re- developments that may be planned. Mr. Rosland added that a traffic engineering firm has been contacted for an estimate of a traffic study for the entire area. The estimated cost would be $14,500 and he suggested the cost could be assessed back to various developments as they occur. authorized. for the project, Mr. Johnson indicated they would like to begin construction this fall yet and therefore would seek final rezoning approval in November, if preliminary approval would be.granted now. traffic study being done as soon as possible but that he felt Council should review the report before granting preliminary rezoning approval. that Council should have the traffic study report for review before preliminary approval. regardless of this proposed project, Member Bredesen urged that a traffic study be made so that some solutions could be found to relieve the current problem. He added that he felt the cost of this study should be born by all who are currently contri- buting to the traffic density in the area, rather than just developers. Member Turner stated she agreed that there is a traffic problem in the area now and would support such a study so that Council could review the results before final approval. In response to Mr. Klein as to participation by Hennepin County, Mr. Hoffman stated that the county would be involved in the study and possible solutions to the problem. He explained that the proponents are requesting a rezoning Approximately 1.4 under- ' The proposed plan was It was also Mr. Hughes advised that Robert Johnson and Michael Klein, Mr. Johnson stated that Staff would recommend the Craffic study be .:.::I. In response to Member Richards' question as to estimated time frame Member Richards stated that he would support the Member Schmidt agreed Stating that he felt there is a traffic problem in the Grand View area 9/19/83 84 Following discussion as how the matter could be expedited, Member Schmidt moved authorization of a traffic study for the Grand View area and that a report be made to the Council prior to preliminary rezoning approval from C-2 to PRD-5 Planned Residential District and that the hearing on this matter be continued to November 7, 1983. Motion was seconded by Member Richards. ' Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried Mr. Robert Johnson then asked Council to identify any concerns or questions they would like addressed before the rezoning hearing. would be considering the density or number of units, lot coverage and open space building height and parking. PRELIZ4INARY PLAT APPROVED FOR PETERSON REPLAT OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1, INDIAN HILLS. Affidavit of Notice was presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. property identified as Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills Addition, advising that the subject property measures 92,200 square feet in area, is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District and is developed with a single family dwelling which is centrally located on the lot. create one new buildable lot which would be located westerly of the existing build- ing. -the land within the bed of Arrowhead Lake) and about 90 feet in width. Nr. Hughes indicated that at the Community Development and Planning Commission meeting it was mentioned that there could be a different configuration for the lot line so as to provide a larger lot area than proposed. The request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at its August 31, 1983, meeting and the Commission recommended approval of the subdivision. a telephone call from Mrs. John Weston, 6516 Indian Hills Road, stating that she was unable to appear at this meeting and wanted to convey to Council her strong - opposition to the subdivision. Mrs. Muriel Peterson, the proponent, advised that she and her husband had lived in their home for the last 35 years and she was re- questing the subdivision to allow a new house in which she would live following her husband's death in July, while her son would occupy the present dwelling. added that she would work with her neighbors and the City staff to meet the zoning ordinance requirements. Mark Peterson referred to a letter he and his mother had written to members of the Council which set forth their position in this matter and read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Gordon Peterson in support of the subdivision. Richard Smith, 6600 Mohawk Trail, advised that: his home is directly south of the subject property and that he was concerned that if the proposed house were built on the flat area of the property, it would block his view of Arrowhead Lake. Commission meeting was contingent upon seeing the plan, the plat, the elevation and the topography. Speaking in favor of the subdivision was Orrin Haugen, 6612 Indian Hills Drive. resolution and moved its adoption: Council responded that they Nr. Hughes presented the request for preliminary plat approval for The proponent is requesting a subdivision of the property,to The new lot would measure about 19,000 square feet in area (exclusive of Mr. Hughes informed the Council members that he had received She . He added that his approval of the proposed subdivision voiced at the Planning There being no further comments, Member Richards offered the following RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR PETERSON REPLAT OF LOT 3, BLOCK 1, INDIAN HILLS BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that that certain plat known as Peterson Replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills, platted by Muriel V, Peterson, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 19, 1983, be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. REZONING REQUEST FROM PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO PC-2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT OF GLASER'S ADDITION TO EDINA APPROVED. Affidavit of Notice was presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Mr. Hughes presented the request of Kenneth "Chip" Glaser for rezoning from PID . Planned Industrial District to PC-2 Planned Commercial District for property gen- erally located north of the Radisson South Hotel and west of Highway 100, advising that the subject property measures 2.75 acres in area. The proponent is requesting a rezoning to PC-2 Planned Commercial District for the property which would facili- tate the construction of a 15,000 square foot building on the westerly portion of the site. ,by complementary fast food restaurants and the balance of the building would be occupied by retail uses which have not been determined. parking has been provided on the site which complies with the zoning ordinance. Also included in the petition for rezoning at staff's suggestion is the Minnesota Federal building and lot located on the easterly one-third of the property for these reasons: 1) the parcel occupied by Minnesota Federal is below the minimum lot size for PID lots, and 2) a financial institution is more appropriately zoned PC-2 District.rather than PID District. Also requested is a lot subdivision of the property to separate the retail site from the Minnesota Federal parcel. I As proposed, about 60% of the floor area of the building would be occupied Mr. Hughes advised that Staff 9 1191 83 85 believes the proposed use will provide a needed service facility for the adjacent office and industrial district and that the site is appropriate for the retail uses due to its proximity to adjoining commercial uses and collector and arterial streets. Mr. Hughes advised that at its August 31, 1983, meeting the Community Development and Planning Commission had recommended preliminary approval of the rezoning and plat. Peter Jarvis of BRW, representing the proponent, noted one change in the site plan as requested by staff which would align the access to the site with Metro Boulevard. of the restaurant spaces along with a chicken and a bakery type restaurant, and that approximately 6,300 square feet on the west end of the building would be devoted to convenient retail uses to serve the large employment base that exists in the area. He presented a graphic showing the building, landscape plan, berms and material to screen the parking area. Member Schmidt asked if something could be done to faci- litate the traffic in and out of the site. was relocated in anticipation of a traffic signal to be installed at Metro Boulevard, that turning movement counts have been taken preliminary to anticipated traffic signals being placed at 70th Street and Metro Boulevard and at East Bush Lake Xoad and Edina Industrial Boulevard within the next year or two. heard, Member Bredesen offered Ordinance No. 811-A174 for First Reading as follows: He added that a Dairy Queen Brazier would occupy one Mr. Hoffman explained that the driveway No further comments being ORDINANCE NO. 811-A174 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811) BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PC-2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FROM PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: by adding the following thereto: by the addition of the following property: Section 1. "The extent of the Planned Commercial District (Sub-District PC-2) is enlarged Lot 4, Block, 1, Replat of Edina Interchange Center." Sec. 2. Paragraph 2 of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is amended "The extent of the Planned Industrial District is reduced by removing the follow-.- Lot 4, Block 1, Replat of Edina Interchange Center." Sec. 3. Paragraph 7 of Section 9 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto: ing property : This ordinance shall be in full .force and effect upon its passage and publication. Member Bredesen then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR GLASER'S ADDITION TO EDINA BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that that certain plat known as Glaser's Addition to Edina, platted by Kenneth "Chip" Glaser, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 19, 1983, be and is hereby granted prelimi- nary plat approval-conditioned upon subdivision dedication. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Courtney Resolution adopted. EDINA CONCERNS DISCUSSED WITH FIELD REPRESENTATIVE OF SENATOR BOSCHWITZ. Mr. Rosland introduced Donald W.Mosher, field representative of Senator Rudy Boschwitz, who stated that he had asked to meet with the Council to learn of local concerns so that he could advise Senator Boschwitz. : sharing by the Congress for another three years and also advised as to the status of the Telecommunications Act which was passed by the U.S. Senate in June. expressed by Council Members included 1) loss of local control of cable television, 2) that an extention of revenue sharing would not reduce Federal spending, 3) a need for lower interest rates for home mortgages so that young people can buy homes, and 4) less government involvement generally so as to reduce the Federal deficit. No action was taken. He gave an update on *the extention-of revenue Concerns TRAFFIC SAFETY MINUTES OF 9/13/83 APPROVED. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Richards to approve the following recommendations as listed in SeCti0n.A -of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of September 13, 1983: 1) Installation of "NO PARKING - SUNDAYS" signs on France Avenue South from West 52nd Street southward to the existing regulated area at approximately the north entrance to Grace Church. 2) Installation of "NO PARKING ANYTIME" signs on the south side of West 52nd Street from the Grace Church driveway eastward to France Avenue South. 3) The recommendation that Grace Church erect "STOP" signs at all of its parking lot exists. 4) The Engineering Department should contact Hennepin County and the City of Minnea- polis for the engineering of left-turn lanes on northbound France Avenue at West 54th Street and West 52nd Street. 1 5) The installation of various regulatory signs, such as "NO PARKING HERE TO CORNER", 9/19/83 to assure adequate traffic movement, turning and access to fire hydrants in the area of Halifax Avenue South and Halifax Lane. Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Courtney Motion carried. As recommended in Section C of the minutes, Member Bredesen offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD IDREAS, the Crosstown Highway 62 segment from Highway 100 east to the Edina border is under Hennepin County control, and TDREAS, the Crosstown Highway is a location of frequent accidents in Edina as compared to other freeway roads within the community, and WHEREAS, from 1979 through 1982 there have been 131 reported accidents on the Crosstown Highway segment from France Avenue to Highway 100 of which 59 were per- sonal injury accidents, and WHEREAS, this segment of highway appears to have more potential hazard due to its configuration then other highway/f reeway segments in the community, and WHEREAS, during inclement weather considerable incidents occur with vehicles leaving the roadway and result in constant police and public safety staff time monitoring this highway segment to the detriment of the rest of the community, and WHEREAS, the Edina Traffic Safety Committee has recommended to the City Council of Edina that action be taken to promote improvement of this highway segment to reduce accidents and incidents; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Edina requests that the Hennepin County Board take action to correct the existing problems on this highway segment (Crosstown Highway 62 from east Edina City borders to Highway 100). Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Richards. I Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. 1984 BUDGET HEARING DATES SCHEDULED. Mr. Rosland reminded Council of the remain- ing scheduled budget hearing dates, Thursday, September 22 and Monday, September 26 at 7:OO p.m. and advised that interested groups and individuals would be notified of the September 22 meeting date so,that their input could be heard. was taken. PLAN FOR BREDESEN PARK DEVELOPMENT APPROVED. Mr. Rosland recalled that a public hearing had been held in August of 1980 on the improvement project for Bredesen Park (Mud Lake) for which the City:.af Edina had petitioned the Nine Mile Creek - Watershed District in July of 1977 to undertake and implement this project. lowing the public hearing Council had given preliminary approval to the joint project as proposed by the Watershed District. been prepared and final approval now is requested. it is proposed to start construction in early winter of 1983-84, continuing through the entire year of 1984 with the scheduled completion date specified as September 1, 1985. The Watershed District will assume the cost of the hydrologic work such as dredging of the ponds, etc. For the recreation facilities (walking paths, rest rooms, interior paths and parking lots) the City will share the cost with the Watershed District on a 50/50 basis. A graphic was presented showing two major paths, one for walking and one for biking, with rest room facilities and parking provided off Olinger Road, and with some interior nature trails. He pointed out . a curbed asphalted area just south of the parking lot which will be used by the City in the winter time to dump snow removed from the streets. would pass through two skimming ponds before discharge into-Nine Mile Creek. Mr. Rosland advised that the total project is estimated at $880,841 with the City's share estimated at $233,000, which likely could be reduced to $200;000 with the recommendation that the cost be paid from tlie developers' fund inasmuch as this is a regional City park. City. posed with the motion being seconded by Member Turner. No action I Fol- A preliminary cost estimate has Mr. Rosland explained that The snow melt Maintenance of Bredesen Park would be a function of the Member Schmidt then moved final approval of the'Bredesen Park plan as pro- -- I -Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Abstained: Richards Motion carried. STAFF/COUNCIL GOVERNMENTAL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS TO BE DISCUSSED 10/3/83. Mr. Rosland called Council's attention to a draft document which would implement a Council Intergovernmental Policy, one of the strategic objectives identified in the Long Range Planning process. Staff would suggest Council representation to various these and bring their comments for discussion at the October 3, 1983 meeting. No action was taken. . intergovernmental bodies as noted therein. He asked the Council Members to review RESOLUTION ADOPTED GRANTING RELEASE OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS/GLEASON COURT. As pointed out by Mr. Hughes, a request for release of protective covenants has been received for property generally located south of Artic Way and west of Gleason 9/19/83 I I Road. struction of 14 double bungalow units. a previous owner of the land as part of his proposal to build 84 condominium units and since the rezoning the covenants are no longer appropriate for the double bungalow project. Staff would recommend release of the restrictions. No comments being heard, Member Turner offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RE SOLUTION WHEREAS, Ron Clark Construction, Inc. is the fee owner of record of the following described property : He recalled that this property had been replatted recently to permit con- The protective covenants were filed by Lots 1 through 14, Block 1, Gleason Court, according to the duly recorded plat thereof ("the Property") , and WHEREAS, the Property is subject to certain restrictions for the benefit of the City of Edina as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated July 31, 1970, filed December 31, 1970, recorded as Document No. 3865172, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated February 1, 1971, filed November 5, 1971, recorded as Document No. 3915247, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, and as set forth in Amended Declaration of Protective Covenants dated April 27, 1972, filed April 27, 1972, recorded as Document No. 3943173, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds (hereinafter collectively called "the Declarations"); and WHEREAS, the Declarations provide for the amendment, modification, release or revocation of the protective covenants at any time and from time to time by the then owner of the Property upon the consent of the City of Edina in the form of a Resqlution of the.City Council of the City of Edina, a certified copy of which is to be duly recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Ron Clark Construction, Inc. has petitioned the City of Edina to revoke and release the Declarations; and WHEREAS, the continued enforcement of the Declarations is no longer necessary and the revocation and release of said Declarations is in keeping with the spirit and intent of applicable ordinances and the development presently contemplated for the property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina hereby revokes and releases the DecLlarations in their entirety. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Schmidt. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. DRAFT STATEMENT OF PURPOSE/COMMITTEE ON ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR DELIVERING MUNICI- PAL SERVICES.PRESENTED. a Committee on Alternative Strategies for Delivering Municipal Services which he had Member Bredesen presented a draft Statement of Purpose for offered to prepare and asked Council to review it for their comments. that this matter would be placed on the October 3, 1983, Council agenda for further discussion. It was agreed COUNCIL MINUTES TO BE ATTACHED TO STAFF REPORTS WHEN FINAL READING OR APPROVAL IS BEING CONSIDERED. iously be attached to the staff report when a planning matter is on the agenda for Second Reading or final approval, to provide a review for Council. Mr. Hughes responded that the minutes excerpts would be included. Member Richards asked that Council Minutes of action taken prev- CONCERN OF RESIDENTS REGARDING BOATS PARKED ON DRIVEWAYS DISCUSSED. Mayor Courtney advised that he has received several telephone calls from residents who are object- ing to the City ordinance which permits boats to be stored on driveways. No action was taken. RESIDENCES IDENTIFIED WITH TALL GRASS PROBLEMS. presented a list of Edina residences where tall grass in lawns have been reported in violation of the City ordinance so that Council could view the problems. was taken . As requested by Council, Mr. Rosland No action PARK AT 62ND STREET AND BEARD AVENUE TO BE RENAMED "HERMAN STRACHAUER PARK". Mr. Rosland advised that at the September 13, 1983, Park Board meeting a recommendation was made that Beard Park be renamed "Herman Strachauer Park". meeting that Herman Strachauer had served on the Park Board from 1948 to 1958 and that he was chairman at the time that most of the City's park land was acquired. Member Richards' motion was seconded by Member Bredesen to rename the park at 62nd Street and Beard Avenue now known as Beard Park to "Herman Strachauer Park" in honor of Mr. Strachauer's service to the City on the Park Board. It was noted at the Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 1120-82 (CABLE TELEVISION SUBSCRIBER RATE CHANGE) ADOPTED ON SECOND READING. As recommended, Member Bredesen offered Ordinance No. 1120-A2 for Second Reading as follows: 9 /19 / 83 ORDINANCE NO. 1120-A2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDINA AMENDING THE CABLE COPDlUNICATIONS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE NO. 1120, EXHIBIT By PARAGRAPH I, SUBPARAGRAPHS Al, A3, By Cy D, E AND H1 AND H4 TO CHANGE THE RATES AND CHARGES FOR INSTALLATION, MONTHLY RATES, CONVERTER, RECONNECTION, EXTRA OUTLETS, COMMERCIAL RATES, FM SERVICES AND PREMIUM SERVICES AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE TIME OF THIS ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 1120, Exhibit B is amended to read as follows: . I. SUBSCRIBER NETWORK Subdivision 1. Paragraph I.A.l. is amended to read as follows: A. Basic Rates. 1. TIERS Standard 150 Ft. Aerial Seniors and Installation Monthly Homebound . (First Outlet) TIER 1 Universal Service '-$24.95 Free Free Converter not required for this service Subscriber owns converter $24.95 $ 3.95 $ 3.36 Subscriber rents converter from Grantee $24.95 Various Various Subscriber owns converter $24.95 $ 6.50 $ 5.52 Subscriber rents converter from Grantee $24.95 *Various *Various Expanded Service and unit) Subscribers will have the option of renting various types of converters TIER 2 Family Service TIER 3 Full Service (Expanded) (Included converter $24.95 $13.95 $13.25 Subdivision 2. Paragraph I.A.3. is amended to read as follows: 3. as follows: Grantee Converter Rate Schedule Description Initial Monthly Rate 1. OAK L-35 $1.50 A. Set-top converter $4:00 B. Set-top converter with remote control including remote volume. $5.50 C. Enhanced Set-top converter with enhanced remote control including remote volume muting, favorite channel $6 .OO I 2. ZENITH Z-TAC The rental rate shall be added to the appropriate base rate shown in the table above if the subscriber rents the converter from Grantee. Subscribers may choose to rent or buy converters from sources other than the Grantee; however, a Grantee converter or descrambler will be necessary for premium services. Subdivision 3. Paragraph I.B. is amended to read as follows: B. Extra Outlets. *Installation (At time of initial Installation) Monthly TIER 1 Converter not required $15.00 each Free TIER 2 Subscriber owns converter $15.00 each $1.95 each Subscriber rents converter $15.00 each ** Various TIER 3 Subscriber owns' converter $15.00 each $4.95 each Subscriber rents converter from Grantee $15.00 ** Various * Each outlet installed after the initial installation will be $19.95 each. ** Same Converter rental option as provided for under Section IA of this Exhibit B. Subdivision 4. Paragraph I.C. is amended to read as follows: Charges for reconnection of existing installations shall be $19.95 for each Subdivision 5. These rates will be subject to negotiation and will depend on the number of out- C. Reconnection. reconnection regardless of the number of outlets. D. Commercial Rates for Subscriber Network Services. lets required and the type of services selected. department store requesting 10 outlets on TIER 3 with no converters and no premium pay would be: Paragraph I.D. is amended to read as follows: A typical commercial rate for 9 I19 I83 89 I Tl= 0 P- 0 m a Installation (at cost on time and material basis) Monthly Rate 1st outlet $20.00 3rd outlet $10.00 Additional outlets $ 9.00 2nd outlet . . $15.00 . Subdivision 6. Paragraph I.E. is amended to read as follows: E. FM Rates. FM service rates shall be $10.00 for installation and $2.50 Der month. FM service shall be available only on TIER 2 and TIER 3 and not available on TIER 1. Subdivision 7. Paragraph I.H.l. is amended to read as follows:, H.. Premium Services. 1. Premium service rates shali be as follows: Home Box Office $8.95 CINEMAX $8.95 The Movie Channel $8.95 Showtime $8.95 Premiere $8.95 Bravo $8.95 Monthly HTN plus ~$8.95 The Disney Channel $9.95 Spectrum Sports $9.95 Subdivision 8. Paragraph I.H.4 is amended to read as follows: 4. Installation for premium services shall be free with the initial installation of TIER 2 or 3 service. same time shall be added at a maximum cost of $19.95. SECTION 2. standing any other provision of this Ordinance, if all of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield do not adopt a similar franchise Ordinance amendment then the City of Edina ("City") may cancel this franchise Ordinance amend- ment. This right of cancellation must be exercised within Phirty (30) days after all of said Cities have acted on a similar amendment. nance No. 1120) shall have thirty (30) days from the last date of adoption of a similar franchise Ordinance amendment by all of the Cities listed in Section 2, Subdivision 1, of this Ordinance, to accept this franchise Ordinance amendment by an acceptance in form and substance acceptable to City. acceptance occur later than ninety (90) days after the adoption of this franchise Ordinance amendment unless the time for acceptance is extended by City. acceptance by Grantee shall be deemed the grant of this franchise Ordinance amend- ment for all purposes. Subdivision 3. Requirements with Acceptance. With its acceptance, Grantee also shall deliver to City an opinion from its legal counsel, acceptable to City, stating that this franchise Ordinance amendment has been duly accepted by Grantee, that the said Ordinance, as amended by this franchise Ordinance amendment is en- forceable against Grantee, and the corporations which signed the Agreement of joint and several liability dated January 9, 1981 relative to the franchise granted by the said Ordinance, in accordance with its terms, and which opinion shall otherwise be in form and substance acceptable to City. Subdivision 4. Effectiveness of Ordinance. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and publication and acceptance in writing by Grantee. Thereafter, any number of premium services added at the Process for Adoption and Acceptance. Subdivision 1. Adoption by Other Member Cities and Cancellation. That notwith- Subdivision 2. Time for Adoption and Acceptance. Grantee (as defined in Ordi- However, in no event will Such Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Abstained: Richards Ordinance adopted. ATTEST : Mayor *&%. Oa-uL- City Clerk CLAIMS PAID. the following Claims as per Pre-List: Art Fund $610.45 , Swimming Pool $1 , 492.27 , Golf Course $15,503.79 , Recreation $6 , 803.89 , Gun Range $366.56, Water $35,589.36, Sewer Rental $2,522.96, Liquor Fund $79,089.96, Construction $211,607.12, Total $470,260.93; and for Confirmation of the following: General Fund $50,313.19, Gun Range $398.00, Liquor Fund $207.495.81, Total $258,207.00. . Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Schmidt for payment of General Fund $113,560.89, Park Fund $3,113.68, Motion carried. There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 1O:OO p.m. City Clerk