Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19850520_regular155 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL MAY 20, 1985 Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney. rl 0 AWARD OF HONOR PRESENTED. which, as a plaque, was presented to Theodore Charles Frank: Mayor Courtney read the following Award of Honor Award of Honor Theodore Charles Frank April 22, 1985 Theodore Charles Frank is given the Award of Honor for his heroic rescue act of April 22, 1985. On that date, he was traveling on West 66th. Street in Edina adjacent to Lake Cornelia. Another motorist lost control of her vehicle, and it left the roadway, going:into the lake. The driver was unable to extricate herself, and the vehicle began to sink. With little regard for his own personal safety, Mr. Frank dove into the icy water, swam to the vehicle, dove underwater to check for.additiona1 passengers, and then freed the driver by pulling her through the window of the vehicle. Mr. Frank then aided the driver to shore and provided for her comfort. Mr. Frank's deeds exceed those expected of the common man. He acted in a courageous manner and possibly saved the life of a motorist. For this, he deserves our commendation and Award of Honor. Signed: Craig Swanson, Chief of Police; and C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor. EMPLOYEE COMMENDED. Mr. Rosland introduced Rick Jacobson, the City's Assistant Park and.Recreation Director. Park and Recreation in Golden Valley. He has been with the City of Edina since 1969, coming on board as the Recreation Supervisor. In 1977, he became the Assistant Park and Recreation Director. On behalf of the City of Edina, Mr. Rosland extended wishes for success in his new position, and he commented that Rick is one of the finest Park and Recreation people in the Twin City area and the State of Minnesota. Rick will be leaving to become the Director of m a PRD-3 PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVED FOR CAHILL ROAD AND WEST 78TH STREET (KLODT CON- STRUCTION). Affidavits of Notice were presented by Acting City Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen advised that the subject project, generally located at the-NW quadrant of Cahill Road and West 78th Street, was rezoned to PRD-3 in 1980 to allow the construction of an 89 unit, 8 building condominium project. In.March of 1983, a plan was approved which contained 54 condominium units in two buildings on the east side of the site while leaving three original condominium buildings containing 35 units on the westerly portion of the site. In August of 1983, a second amendment was approved which increased the condominium count from 54 to 60 units and replaced the original units on the west side with 29 townhouse units. None of the plans have commenced construction. Mr. Larsen stated that the proponent, Klodt Construction Company, had submitted new plans which modify the overall development by reducing the number of townhouse units from 29 to 24 and increases the number of condominium units from 60 to 65, all of which would be in one building, not two as previously approved. townhouse units were presented as four six-unit structures. The overall density of 8.5 units per acre and the unit count of 89 remains the same in all proposals. . The current proposal represents a departure from the earlier proposal in two significant respects. building. This results in a much more imposing building. Second, the townhouses are now proposed to have one main living floor and a walk-out basement. earlier proposal had two living levels plus a basement. coverage and increases the amount of the site occupied by the townhouses. Larsen explained that there would be 2,015 square feet for each townhouse unit, which includes the floor area of the garages. unit sizes would be similar to those in the previous plan. condominium building have been reduced slightly in size and are now proposed at the minimum size required in the Ordinance. Parking, lot coverage and building and parking setbacks all conform to the requirements of the.Zoning Ordinance. The landscaping plan conforms in regard to'quantit&es, but the sizes of some items are smaller than required. 'diameter, and coniferous trees should be at least 6 feet in height. The proposed utility plan is satisfactory for the condominium but needs additional information for the townhouse portion of the site. The two curb cuts on Cahill Road limit or prevent access by fire-fighting equipment. proposed use and mix of unit'types remain from previously approved plans and that Staff continues to support the concept. The Community Development and Planning Commission heard the subject'proposal at its May 1, 1985, meeting and recommended approval, subject to the following conditions: 1) Redesign of access to accommodate emergency vehicles; 2) A utility plan acceptable to City Staff; 3) Developer's agreement; 4) Shademaster Locust be increased to a minimum caliper diameter of The First, the condominium units would now all be in one The This increases lot Mr. In this respect, the individual Units in the Deciduous trees should be 2% inches -_ -- in -' Mr. Larsen reported that the 5/20/85 -- 2% inches; and 5) Spruce trees be increased to a mininum of six feet in height. Mr. Paul Klodt, the proponent of the plan, was introduced. He explained that the change was being made in the townhouse project; the one-story unit would be marketed much better than the two or three-story units. Most of the units would be walk-outs. Mr. Klodt felt that the market for this particular type of unit was the "empty nester." The proponent met with the neighbors and expressed their - e.. A concern regarding the proximity of the project to their property; the proponent .I T agreed to provide a hedge of evergreens to shield the project from the neighbors' I t view, which in turn would help the project aesthetically. that the apartment-type units would be pretty much the same as the original plan, except that they would now be in one building instead of two. Mrs. Kelly pointed out that this was a pretty piece of property and hoped that as many of the trees as possible could be saved. Mr. William Harrison, on the Board of Directors of the Winwood Association, was introduced. other. evergreens, and Mr. Klodt assured him that the landscaping will take this into then thanked Mr. Klodt and wished him well. No further comment being heard, Member Richards moved adoption of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the petition of Klodt Construction Company for a PRD-3 Plan Amendment for townhouse/condominium units at Cahill Road and West 78th Street be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1) Redesign of access to accommodate emergency vehicles; 2) A utility plan acceptable to City Staff; 3) Developer's agreement; 4) Shademaster Locust be 8 I I increased to a minimum caliper diameter of 2% inches; and 5) Spruce trees be ! Mr. Klodt advised I He explained that Winwood is a neighbor of Pondwood to the north, and a common boundary is shared from one side to the 1 He expressed the concern about the protection offered by the hedge of - consideration. Also under consideration is the view from Cahill. Mr. Harrison I RESOLUTION i increased to a minimum of six feet in height. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. i Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney I Rollcall : Resolution adopted. I ! FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR OPUS CORpO?XATION/NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEMS. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Acting City Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen described the subject property as being generally located west of France Avenue and south of West 76th Street at 7700 France Avenue. He reported that it is being developed with a four-story office building containing . 229,100 square feet of floor area. quarters for National Car Rental. 1984, the site was rezoned from Planned Industrial District (PID) to Planned Office District-2 (POD-2). National Car is proposing a five-story addition containing a gross area of approximately 106,655 square feet which would be constructed on the north end of the existing four-story building. limits were imposed on this and other parcels in the plat of Edina Office Center in 1978 because of traffic concerns in the area; these restrictions were removed by the City Council in 1983. The development of the site is now limited by the 0.5 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the Office District in the Zoning Ordinance, and the-proposed addition would result in a FAR of approximately 0.36 for the site. Mr. Larsen reported that the Zoning Ordinance requires parking at a rate of one space for each 250 square of gross floor area in office buildings which are in excess of 220,000 square feet. National Car, the proposal calls for approximately 230 more parking spaces than required by the Zoning Ordinance. south of the building maintain non-conforming setbacks. requires that all parking and drive aisles maintain a 20-foot minimum setback from any street right-of-way. The proponents have stated their willingness to remove the parking spaces, but due to the location of certain mechanical equipment near the building, relocat5on of the drive isle to conform to the setback requirement would be difficult and costly. Thus, a 5-foot setback variance is! requested for the drive isle. Mr. Larsen explained that when the property was platted, a 40-foot easement was dedicated along the southerly boundary of the property and a 60-foot wide easement was provided on the westerly end of the site to provide a connection to West 77th Street. It was anticipated that these roadways would be constructed when the drive-in theater was redeveloped. BRW to make a recommendation on the design of the link from West 77th Street to the new road. the existing high quality of the development. Approval of the final development plan along with a 5-fOOr drive isle setbackvariance to allow the existing drive isle to remain is recommended with the following conditions: 1) That additional right-of-way, as needed'on the westerly portion of the site, be dedicated at this time; and 2) That the non-conforming parking speces along the south property line be removed. Mr. Bob Worthington of Opus Corporation, representing National Car, was introduced. He explained that the addition will be used for additional office space' for National Car, utilizing,an open office concept. The building will serve as corporate head- When the new Zoning Ordinance was adopted in Floor area Due Co the high parking demand created by The drive aisle and 15 existing parking stalls The Zoning Ordinance The City has commissioned It was reported that staff believes that the addition will compliment Additional storage space I f c 5/20/85 157 will be needed, and the cafeteria will be expanded to allow for a French outdoor cafe feeling instead of a totally enclosed space. utility rooms within the building. Mr. Worthington feels the design is com- patible with the existing architecture, and they may be back in the future for even further expansion. Construction, if the project is approved, is slated to begin in June of 1985, with a completion date of April, 1986. questioned the proposed road to be cut through on the southern portion as to whether it will impact the proposed Homart Project and its nearness to the drainage ditch. of the ditch and northwest over to 77th Street. He comented that the road is tied into serving both properties (Homart and Opus), and it serves as an extra outlet from the Pentagon Park area. and the other half is in Bloomington. There will also be space for Member Kelly Mr. Hoffman explained that the road will go right over the top Half of the road is on Edina's property, No further comment being heard, Member l Turner moved adoption of the following resolution: ! RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Final Development Plan for Opus Corporation/National Car Rental Systems at 7700 I France Avenue be and hereby approved and that a 5-fOOt drive isle setback variance is granted, subject to the following conditions: 1) That additional right-of-way, as needed on the westerly portion of the site, be dedicated at I this time; and 2) That the non-conforming parking spaces along the south property line be removed when the new street is constructed. resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Motion for adoption of the Rollcall : Ayes : Kelly , Richards , Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. - ~ - R-2 DOUBLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT FOR ROBERT ANDERSON OF 425 WASHINGTON AVENUE FAILED FIRST READING. approved and ordered <laced on file. Planner Larsen stated that the subject property is generally located east of Washington Avenue and north of Maloney Avenue, actually on the corner of Washington Avenue and Maloney Avenue. Road 18 is located to the immediate west of the site and Grandview Cemetery is to the south. The site measures 70 feet inwidth, approximately 125 in depth and contains 8,898 square feet of lot area. The site is vacant. The proponent, Mr. Robert Anderson, is requesting rezoning of the site from R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District to R-2, Double Dwelling Unit District, in order to allow the construction of a two-unit dwelling. to be at least 90 feet in width and to contain at least 15,000 square feet in lot area. to make this a buildable R-2 site. Mr. Larsen described the two-block stretch of lots fronting on Washington Avenue as low-density attached residential. At the present time, there are four existing doubles which are zoned R-2 and two legal, non-conforming doubles on Washington. There are eleven single-dwelling units fronting on Washington Avenue. between 76 and 79 feet in width, except for the most northerly lot which measures 124 feet in width. Mr. Larsen explained that the subject site is designated by the Comprehensive Plan as being suitable for the proposed use. the PIan 'contains a policy which states: filling of single-family dwellings to 'multi-family uses if located in areas designated as low density attached residential. filling should require rezoning and upgrading of dwellings and properties to multi-family standards." that a modestly sized double bungalow or duplex could be constructed on the site which would conform to zoning ordinance requirements. that the development or redevelopment of properties along Washington as doubles is reasonable and to be expected; however, he commented that staff does have reservations concerning the minimum size of lots to be developed as doubles. Mr.'Robert Anderson, the owner of the subject property, presented to the Council the plan of the structure. He pointed out that the garages are in the front of the structure, with the setback being 30 or 35 feet. which is not being used at the present time; the lots have extended into the alley, although the alley has not been officially vacated. immediately to the south, and County Road 18 is to the front of the dwelling, immediately to the west. hood of single-family residences; he felt that a more appropriate use, given the variance being requested, would be R-1 and not R-2. support the Planning Commission's recommendation. this concept is similar to accessory housing; this is a transitional area between single family homes and a busy highway. She felt that it was an opportunity for relatively modest housing and that the zoning request is appropriate. exact same square footage of land has doubled its density; this creates Affidavizs of Notice were presented by Asfing City Clerk, County The zoning ordinance requires R-2 lots Consequently, lot width and lot area variances would also be required The existing double bungalow lots measure The existing R-1 lots measure between 45 and 78 feet in width. In addition to this designation, "Consider the redevelopment or retro- Such redevelopment or retro- Using the required setbacks for the lot, it' appears Mr. Larsen stated (At this time, 7:35 PM, Member Bredesen arrived.) There is an alley in the back The cemetery is Member Richards-indicated that this is a strong neighbor- Therefore, he did not Mrs. Turner commented that Member Richards indicated that this is a situation in which the 5/ 20/85 problems in other contexts and other forms. He felt that land packages could be created for a better environment. home on either William or Bedford built on property that wasn't quite adequate, so the garage was put out in front. Mr. Anderson commented that the garage out in front of the subject property was to serve as a buffer from County Road 18. He added that there are two double bungalows right next door to the project. of the zoning change was seconded by Member Kelly. Member Kelly pointed out a similar There being no further discussion, Member Turner's motion for approval Rollcall: . Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner Nays : Richards , Courtney Motion failed. APPEAL FROM BOARD OF APPEALS & ADJUSTMENTS REGARDING JOHN GABBERT'S PROPERTY AT 7010 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH WITHDRAWN. proponent has asked to withdraw the appeal, which pertained to 7010 France Avenue South, Lot 1 and adjacent vacated R. W. W., Block 1, Stow's Edgemoor Addition. There was no further discussion. Planner Larsen reported that the HEALTH HAZARDS OF LAWN SPRAYING WITH CHEMICALS DISCUSSED. Mary Reed, 5100 Skyline Drive, spoke of her concern regarding Chemlawn's spraying of chemicals on lawns approximately two times each month. She reported that she had spoken with the Health Department three years ago, and she was told that a study had been done. some new information in regard to the chemicals and associated health hazards. Mr. Rosland reported that the outcome of a study indicated that the City's spraying is done in a very judicious manner and every piece of property is not sprayed all the time. the study done in St. Paul. Mr. Rosland commented that all of the known chemicals are being used; there are pros and cons as to whether any of them cause cancer or not. All of these chemicals, however, have been approved by the State; nevertheless, this does not rule out the fact that they might be harmful. particles from the chemicals getting into the air; he also recommended following up with St. Paul's study. usually in the early.morning and late evening, prior to dark; a wetting agent is used time to time which makes it a heavier spray, and this makes the particles less apt to blow in the air. contacted which builds sprayers to find out what customers use. will report back on this issue. She felt that a new study should be done in that there might be Mayor Courtney recommended obtaining information from Member Bredesen reported that there has been a concern regarding the Mr. Rosland explained that the City's spraying is Perhaps a local company should be Mr. Rosland BID AWARDED FOR SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORbf SEWER AND GRAVELING. Rosland presented the bids for Improvement No.'s SS-369, 370, 85-5B; TJM-353, 354, 355, 85-58; St. S.-175, 176 and C-143, which pertain to sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and graveling. The recommended low bidder was Brown & Csis, Incorporated at $270,258.60; Northdale Construction Company, Incorpor- ated z1'i $290,535.15; G. L. Contracting, Incorporated at $298,509.26; Hayes Contractors, Incorporated at $320,289.83; and L. & G. Rehbein, Incorporated at $354,041.25. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Kelly for award to recommended low bidder, Brown & Cris, Incorporated, for sanitary sew.er, watermain, storm sewer and graveling. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF 5/14/85 APPROVED. Council's authorization of recommendation action, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Kelly to approve the Traffic Safety Committee minutes of May 14, 1985, specifically acknowledging Sections B and C of the Minutes. There being no items for Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. z PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES CONTRACT APPROVED. Mr. Rosland referred to a letter to Mayor Courtney from Mrs. Barbara Reynolds, Chair of the Edina Advisory Health Commission, which provides reasons for renewing the public health contract with the two-year plan of the Community Health Services: 1. for health services in Edina, it makes sense to plan jointly &th service pro- vider for meeting those needs and goals for the full tow-year period. 2. Continuity in the provision of health care services can be guaranteed for at least a minimum of two years. 3. With a two-year contract, the Advisory Commission and the City Council (Board of Health) can become familiar with the service providers and be knowledgeable regarding their capabilities, staff expertise and range of services. providers having knowledge of the community, its residents, resources, and its Because the CHS plan is developed out of the identification of needs and goals . 4. Because of the necessity of the public health service culture," in order to discover needs, to made appropriate referrals, and to 11 5120185 159 provide services and programs, a two-year contract seems necessary. 5. It is important for our Edina residents to become familiar with their health service providers. provider. 6. Each year, many hours of time go into discussion and decision-making by the City Council, the paid staff of the City and the Advisory Commission, that could better be spent in program planning or development, if that decision did not have to be made every year. 7.. The likelihood of an organization entering into a contract seems greater if the contract is for two years; it takes time to develop new systems of services and programs. Mr. Rosland pointed out that this would be a two-year commitment rather than one year at a time and that this is agreeable to the staff. Member Bredesen commented he would like to see what a two-year contract would look like. is moving out of Edina; he thanked her on behalf of the Council. Mayor Courtney remarked that she won't be forgotten after all that she has done for the City, and he then introduced her. Mrs. Reynolds reported that the Advisory Health Commission is an excellent committee of individuals, and she knows that they will continue to work well, especially with the support given them by the City. With no more discussion, Mr. Rosland said that no formal action was needed to approve the Public Health Services contract; he accepted the concurrence of the Council for the acceptance of this contract. Communication is difficult enough without frequent changes in health Member Richards announced that Barbara Reynolds I 4 0 00 (P a a SPACE STUDY COMMITTEE APPROVED. Member Richards motion for appointment of the following persons to serve on the Space Study Committee was seconded by Member Turner: Schmidt, 7005 Bristol Blvd.; Bob Schoening, 4612 Edina Blvd.; Dave Sherman, 19' Circle West. Bob Schoening will serve as Chair. Cathy Christensen, 6600 Pawnee Road; Bart Foster', 6586 Cherokee Trail; June Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. IMPROVEMENT HEARING FOR WEST 70TH STREET/CORNELIA DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SET FOR JUNE 17, 1985. Mr. Hoffman reviewed the report on West 70th Street. He pointed out that the Council had decided that West 70th Street would be'classified as a collector street rather than an arterial roadway. The consultant prepared a signal justification report which was submitted to the State to see if the State would agree that a traffic light was warranted. 'The State mathematically computed that it would meet the criteria for a school-activated crossing, and they would pay 50% of the cost. in this case, there are four approaching legs. Therefore, the State would pay for two West 70th Street legs, or $35,000. The City intends to go ahead with the striping and signing plan. the traffic signal was made to the School District; the Board felt this was an inappropriate request and that the City ought to fund this. Mr. Rosland reported that three areas were investigated in regard to the necessary funding. department heads were asked if their budgets could be investigated for sources of funding and to look at the capital areas in replacement of vehicles and the capital improvements. Second, the question of discontinuing certain programs vas considered, as well as reducing the number of staff in numerous departments and starting new employees at lower rates. make up a portion of approximately $15,000 to $20,000. Mr. Rosland does not recommend laying off staff in any way. Finally, an estimated $50,000 in building .fees from Edinborough is projected, which will be available this year; there will Member Bredesen questioned insurance increases, and Mr. Rosland commented that the amount at this time is unknown. or possibly the reserves. Member Richards asked if. the City has ever had to fund traffic signalization before, and Mr. Hoffman pointed out that this would be the first time. He reported that Southdale Office Center on the west side of France Avenue and Southdale Shopping Center on the east side of France Avenue paid for 100% of the two signals at their major intersections on France Avenue. Bredesen pointed out that the land being school property at 70th SI Cornelia warranted the State's involvement in their portion of the funding, because of the significant amount of pedestrian activity going on. whether approving this signalization would in any way delay going ahead with the signals on Vernon; Mr. Hoffman responded that this would not impact Vernon. Member Richards questioned the length of time it would take to get signalization once approval is given by local government. Mr. Hoffman commented that in this case, because justification has already been evidenced, bid's could be taken in July after plans have been reviewed; the process would take up to twelve weeks, bringing it to termination around the first part of October with this signal at this point in time. Mrs. Phyllis Kohler; 4512 West 70th Street, spoke before the Council; she implied that she believed that this had already been decided on January 21, 1985. Her comments: The State, the citizens and the private con- sultant all say that we need this total package, and the traffic signal is a major part of that package; the park located there, not just the school, uses this corner for crossing in connection with athletic activities; the State gave The State fee is based on "entering legs" to an intersection; A request for funding for the remaining $35,000 for One, Judicial use of the staff could help ' :be joint staffing for this project through Building and Assessing. This situation might bring about going into the contingencies Member Member Turner questioned 5120185 us what we asked for in regard to the funding of this traffic signal. Kelly questioned whether the cost of a self-activating signalwas mQre or less expensive than a regular signal; Mr, Hoffman commented that the cost is the same. Mrs. Kohler indicated that the signal would only operate in a self- activating manner late in the evening and very early in the morning; contrary to most signals, this intersection has unusual peak hours. Mr. Hoffman remarked that "no parking" along 70th Street would have to be authorized by the Council, which means no parking during the 24-hour day. This could affect some of the , residential properties along 70th Street. With the new type of striping layout, there can be no parking along the curb. Mrs. Kohler said that it is usually the tourist who parks along 70th rather than the resident. Mr. Harold Babb, 4701 West 70th, reported that he has never parked along 70th Street; he indicated that the delivery of mail is a problem. Mr. Hof'fman commented that all mailboxes were to be removed from along the curb and mail would be delivered to the houses. At this point, Member Turner moved approval of going ahead with the signal, with the City participating in a cost of approximately $35,000, based on the financial plan presented by Mr. Rosland; this motion was seconded by Member Kelly. This .funding would come out of savings on the staff and fees from Edinborough. Member Bredesen indicated when the insurance premium increases are complete, there might not be any money left over to spend on this project; therefore, he wanted to make sure that this $35,000 expenditure is credited against next year's budget. He pointed out that the school is a major contributor to the traffic problem at this site; the School District's lack of interest in par- ticipating in the funding is remarkable. assessment district there and hold a hearing to decide whether an assessment is the way to pay for this signal. designed and brought back the night of the hearing. 79% of the people who go through this intersection do not live in this Zip code area; these are the people who are causing the problem, and they are not the residents. She questioned, then, why the residents only should be assessed. Mayor Courtney commented that the same thing is true for any other street, and that residents have always paid for their own streets; anyone from any location can use 70th Street at any time. Member Richards supported goinglahead with a design but delaying approval as to the funding or ordering of the project. A notice would then be sent to all the people on 70th as to how the striping will be handled. The staff could then come back with some alternatives as to what the assessment district will look at. Mr. Hoffman reported that staff could be back with the hearing process in place on June 17, 1985. lost in doing this; the frame of Gime for completion would be the same. Member Turner feels strongly that the commitment is there and we must move ahead, and because the assessment hearing will not delay the completion of the signal, she withdrew her motion. will come out the project proposed by Mr. Rosland; therefore, there will be no delay. Mr. Erickson, the City Attorney, explained that there are two stages involved---the improvement hearing comes before tfie assessment hearing. The improvemnt would be ordered after the first hearing, which would take into account the plars already prepared; the assessment hearing would follow, once the assess- ment amount was known. City would pay need not be assessed; any part of it can be assessed. Also at that time of the assessment, the areas assessed can be reduced. Therefore, to start, a fairly large assessment district is recommended; this allows for more manueverability. With*no further discussion, Member Richards' motion that staff move forward to prepare fhe hearing plans and submit them to the State and other appropriate agencies that need to review and approve the plans and that the Staff come back on June 17 for an improvement hearing to discuss an assessment district and finally that notification of the striping on 70th be given to the residents, was seconded by Member Bredesen. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. . Member He encouraged looking into creating an Mr. Hoffman said that the project could be Mrs. Kohler reported that No ground would be If people object to the assessment hearing, the funding then Should an assessment be decided, 100% of the amount the REVIEW OF ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING THE COMMUNITY CENTER'S KITCHEN REFERRED TO A STAFF TASK FORCE. Mr. Rosland explained that the Community Center has ~~ requested the Council to look at an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to permit the occupancy of the Center's kitchen by a commercial caterer. concern with this is whether the catering service would extend its services beyond the confines of the school. Mr. Doug.Johnson, Director of the Edina Community Center, explained that this summer the Center's kitchen will merge with the High School; it will continue to service the Edina schools but will not serve any of tenants and staff within the Center. Currently, the kitchen is operated by the District.. It serves the Center, the Edina elementary schools and Southview Junior High. In addition, it provides coffee, cookies and meals to groups using the facility. revenues of close to $4,000 per:month; the.tota1 gross revenue for the kitchen is close to $400,000 per year. Mr. Johnson stated that the hot lunch program and catering type services are vital to the current and future operation of the Staff's only This "catering" type business produces gross -. .. 5 120185 161 ri 0 03 c') 5 a Community Center. Cooking schools, which fit the zoning requirements, were contacted to find out if there was any interest in leasing the kitchen; this brought no results. Mr. Johnson indicated that the groups that best fit the needs of the Center are catering-type organizations. Numerous caterers have been contacted regarding leasing, and several have expressed interest. All of them have been made aware of the zoning limitations. As a result of this, Mr. Johnson is, therefore, very anxious for the Council to consider a zoning amendment. He pointed out that the Council should keep in mind the following: 1) Food services are critical to the operation of a true Community Center. Tenants, staff and users of the facility all use these services. 2) It is unlikely that any caterer would generate anywhere near as much traffic as the District's own food service. 3) Lease of the kitchen area would provide revenue to offset the cost of operating the Center. this could be done with some type of a conditional use permit, with a limitation that it would have to be reviewed every so often. Member Richards questioned whether the catering service would be able to go out and market its services anywhere in a for-profit type of situation. Mr. Johnson implied that Council might consider restrictions in the form of a conditional use permit; then the Council could vote on a particular group applying for the lease, with staff shedding light on particular applicants. Mr. Johnson explained that the type of group they are looking for would provide the kinds of services necessary for the functioning of the Community Center. the tenants in the building that they will not be servicing them under any condition next year; therefore, unless the Zoning Ordinance is amended and a caterer commissioned, there would be no food service available for them. larger concern would be the lack of service available to the groups using the building. Member Kelly indicated she would support a change in the ordinance to allow this catering service. She explained that a particular tenant, Edina Woman's Club, was not able to meet at the Center because of the cafeteria not being available due to the school already using it. such as that to have access to the Community Center with food or meals available; this does make a true Community Center. Member Bredesen spoke up in opposition to this proposed amendment; he is not in favor of the Center becoming a commercial facility in any way. He implied that the concept of a catering service being operated out of the school, with or without limits on how much they are operating out of the school, runs contrary to the notion of how that facility should be used. He stated that the public problem involved in groups having lunches available from time to time in the Community Center is smaller than the public problem involved in making this facility more commercial in nature. Member Turner reminded Council that they could be turning this over to the Planning Commission, having staff draw up a potential amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for Council to consider. She felt that a food service is key to the Comunity Center for the tenants, the schools there and the occasional groups that would use the facility. set forth a parameter before it goes to the Planning Commission, because it might come back with the words "just a little bit profit" or a "little bit of a comercia1 nature." Member Kelly asked how Member Bredesen felt that this issue affected the neighbors; he commented that a commercial catering operation would not do anything to decrease the traffic and would increase a parking problem. Member Bredesen explained that if the tenants in the building do not want to pay for the cost of having a food service, the public in the area immediately around the faciIity should not have to solve that. He does not recommend sending the proposal back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Johnson explained that a definite rate on trhe kitchen has not yet been set, because this depends on the type of group that comes in, as to how many months of the year they will be operating. Mr. Rosland questioned whether the School District pays any rent now to the Community Center for the kitchen; in a technical sense they pay rent for everything they use because the building loses money. the loss is limited; Member Kelly pointed out that if we have to bend and vary a little, that's progress; Edina probably would not be where it is today if changes had not come along. today is because of its strict adherence to the ordinances. believes in the concept of the user fee in which those users who are going to avail themselves of the service pay for it. work with Mr. Johnson, looking further into this, rather than sending it back to the Planning Commission; this could help create other alt.ernatives without having to change the ordinance. suggested that this group, or task force, consist of Mr. Rosland, Mr. Hughes and Mr. Johnson, and perhaps another City staff member. There being no further discussion, Member Kelly's motion to refer the study of the Community Center's kitchen to the suggested task force was seconded by Member Turner. Mr. Johnson told the Council that The District has already contacted A It would be nice for groups . Member Richards commented that the Council attempt to If they pull out and the Center rents, Member Richards stated that the reason Edina is where it is He reported that he Mr. Rosland recommended that staff A group could brainstorm this, and it was Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. 5/20/8S .- 162 1985 NOMINATIONS FOR I C BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland announced that the League of Minnesota Cities is looking for nominations for its Board of Directors. Mr. Rosland encouraged Council to submit names to the nominating committee. There was no further discussion. Mr. Jim Miller from Minnetonka is running for the Vice Presidency. BILTMORE MOTEL SITE DISCUSSED. site is a blight to the community because it is being poorly maintained. feels the City should go in and cut the grass and assess the present owner. Rosland reported that Council should be hearing from the owner in the near future as Mr. Hughes indicated after a recent meeting. reworked, and there is a new partner. would soon be taken care of, and there was no further discussion. CONCERN RAISED REGARDING CHILDREN BEING USED TO RAISE MONEY FOR A NON-PROFIT CAUSE NOT ALTOGETHER LEGITIMATE. Member Turner reported that she received a telephone call from Mary Kluesner, 4409 Country Club Road, with a concern about children used to raise money, going door-to-door, and whether or not all the concerns are legitimate, especially if the children are not from Edina. Member Turner said the ordinance does not require non-profits to register with the City; for-profit organizations are required to register with the City before they go door-to-door. She reported that she and Mrs. Kluesner spoke with Chief Swanson and found out Chat there are many complaints like this. complaints the City gets during the month of June. solicitors; if they question the legitimacy of the organization, they can call City Hall to check on for-profit registration. Rluesner would like to see the City tighten up its restrictions; however, the City must be careful not to restrict ihe rights of its local organizations from going door-to-door to raise money. Member Bredesen emphasized that a citizen of Edina need not give money to anybody involved in an unknown charity. He indicated that the adults that are taking advantage of these children are going to continue to do so, and they will quickly move on to some other community before the City can begin to do something about it. reported that there a great number of solicitors in her neighborhood who are not from Edina; she indicated that there should be a way of listing all non-profits. Mr. Kojetin suggested that a list could be included in the City's Newsletter. Mr. Erickson explained that the current ordinance regarding solicitations is an old one; he suspects that much of this ordinance is unenforceable. He suggested that it be looked at to see if it could be strengthened and modified. Member Turner cautioned restricting the non-profits. Chief Swanson will continue to track the complaints through June, and sometime thereafter it will be brought back for further discussion. MEETING SET FOR UPDATE OF LONG-RANGE PLANNING BUDGET. that a meeting be planned to update the strategic planning of the budget. starts 'clie budget process in June; an update meeting would be timely. Mr. Rosland recommended June 17 before the Council Meeting, from 5:OO to 7:OO P. M. informally .. agreed to meet at this time. 1 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS ANNOUNCED. Mr. Rosland reminded the Council of the ! Legislative Breakfast on May 24 at 7:30 A. M.,'the Board of Review on May 28 at 5:OO P. M., the AMM Annual Meeting on May 30 at 6:30 P. M. and the LMC Conference from June 11 to June 14 in St. Paul. Mr. Rosland indicated that Member Turner will most likely become a new Board Member at the AMM Annual Meeting. also announced that June 24 is "Edina Nite at the Twins"; this is a big promotion by the Edina Chamber of Commerce. Nember Kelly pointed out that the Biltmore Motel Mr. Apparently, the ownership is being She I I Mr Rosland assured Council that the lawn i 1 I Chief Swanson will keep track of the Member Turner explained that, according to the ordinance, residents have the option of saying "no" to She indicated that Mrs. Member Kelly I Member Turner suggested Staff Council I 1 It was ! I ORDINANCE NO. 1120-A3 AMENDING THE ORDINANCE GRANTING TEMPORARY RELIEF TO ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS ADOPTED ON SECOND READING, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL CONTRACTS BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. Mr. Erickson explained that this Relief Ordinance is basically the same as presented at the last meeting, except for the addition of a clause that it become effective only with the other four cities (Eden Prairie, Hopkins, finnetonka and Richfield) passing a similar ordinance. Mr. Rosland reported that at this time these four cities have granted the ordinance First Reading. Member Bredesen moved adoption of Ordinance No. 1120-A3 subject to approval of the final contracts by the City Manager and the City Attorney: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1120 TO CHANGE THE NAME OF GRANTEE; TO EXTEND THE FRANCHISE TERM; TO CHANGE THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS; AND TO CHANGE THE CO&PUTATION OF THE PURCHASE PRICE TO BE PAID BY CITY UPON EXPIRliTION OF THE FRANCHISE. (At this time,.Member Richards excused himself.) I ORDINANCE NO. 1120-A3 5/20/85 163 THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: amended to read as follows: Section 1. That Article I, Section 2, Paragraphs J and S of said Ordinance be J. "Grantee" is Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership, with Rogers Cablesystems of Minnesota, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, as the General Partner. S. "SWSCC" shall mean the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission. Sec. 2. That Article 11, Sec. 4 of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: This Franchise shall commence upon acceptance by Grantee and shall expire on December 31, 1995. Provfded, however, that if by December 31, 1987, Grantee (i) is able to close on, and have funded, without conditions, new long term financing, reasonably satisfactory to City, to replace the obligation evidenced by loan documents dated April 1, 1982, from Grantee to Toronto Dominion Bank of Toronto, Canada, in the original principal amount of Eighteen Million and No/100 Dollars ($18,000,000.00) (the "Existing Indebtedness"), and (ii) gives written notice of such new financing to City with written evidence thereof reasonably acceptable to City, then, upon the occurrence of (i) and (ii) by December 31, 1987, the term of this Franchise shall be extended by four (4) years, from December 31, 1995 to December 31, 1999, subject, however, to approval of such extension by the Board, if required, and the FCC, if required, and any other governmental body having jurisdiction over the matter, if required. If any such approvals are required, City and Grantee agree to cooperate in obtaining such approvals. If any such approvals are required, and are not obtained, for any reason, then the four (4) year extension shall not become effective. If such extension becomes effective, Grantee and City shall sign and deliver an agreement evidencing such extension, but such extension shall be effective even without such additional agreement. Sec. 3. That Article V, Sec. 2 of said Ordinance be amended by adding thereto F. City may waive, at any time and from time to time, for good cause shown, by Council resolution, compliance by Grantee with any or all of the require- ments imposed on Granteerby this Sec. 2 relative to providing service to any extended area or areas. Sec. 4. That Article VIII, Sec. 2, Paragraph A, subparagraph (4) of said (4) Any and all claims which Grantee may now or hereafter have or claim to have against City, its officers, boards, commissions, servants, agents, employees or officials, due to or arising out of, damage to any of Grantee's property or equipment, including, without limitation, resulting or consequential loss of income, injury to reputation, or any other resulting or consequential damages of any kind, caused by or resulting from acts or omissions of City or any of its officers, boards, commissions, servants, agents, employees or officials. Sec. 5. That Article VIII, Sec. 3, Paragraph A of said Ordinance be amended A. Grantee shall maintain liability insurance covering its obligations of iademnification provided for in, or as a result of the exercise of, this . Franchise (except, however, for the indemnifications in subparagraph (3) of Article VIII, Sec. 2, Paragraph A of this Franchise) covering both the City and Grantee and shall maintain said insurance during the term of this Franchise TI* 00 Ip 5 0 a a new Paragraph F as follows: Ordinance be amended to read as follows: to read as follows: - in the minimum of: ' 1. $500,00.00 for property damage to any one person; 2. $2,000,000.00 for property damage in any one act or occurrence; 3. $1,000,000.00 for personal injury to any one person; and 4. $2,00O,OO0.00 for personal injury in any one act or occurrence. The foregoing insurance may be provided by means of a blanket liability insurance policy or policies with an annual aggregate limitation of not less than $26,000,000.00. Sec. 6. That Article VIII, Sec. 3, Paragraph E of said Ordinance be amended E. All insurance policies maintained pursuant to this Franchise shall contain the following endorsements and provisions: (i) It is hereby understood and agreed that this insurance policy may not be cancelled nor the intention not to renew be stated until 60 days after receipt to City, by registered mail, of written notice of such intention to cancel or not to renew. (ii) A waiver of subrogation, in form and substance acceptable to City, as to any and all claims against the City which are waived hereunder by Grantee or as to which Grantee has agreed hereunder to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers,. boards, commissioners, servants, officials, agents and employees. (iii) A provision that if the aggregate insurance coverage of the blanket policies provided by Grantee is ever reduced below $10,000,000.00, then notice of such fact shall promptly be given to City by Grantee or Grantee's insurance agent and additional liability coverage shall immediately be purchased by Grantee SO as to restore the annual aggrega.te to the minimum amount then required under this Franchise. to read as follows: 5120185 .- Sec. 7. That Article XI, Sec. 2, Paragraph C of said Ordinance be amended to C. The purchase price of the System to be paid by City upon revocation or termination of the Franchise shall be the cost less depreciation (as shown on the books and records of Grantee) or the fair market value, whichever is less, and goodwill shall not be included in the purchase price of the System. if this Franchise expires (and is not revoked or terminated) and if Grantee, has complied with the requirements of Article 11, Sec. 4 of this Franchise, and all required approvals are obtained, so that the Franchise term is extended for an additional four (4) years pursuant to said Sec. 4, then the purchase price of the System to be paid by City upon expiration of this Franchise shall be the fair market value of the System determined on the basis of the System valued as a going concern but with no value given or allocated to this Franchise itself. If the City and Grantee cannot agree on the purchase price, it shall be determined by arbitration pursuant to the provisions of this Sec. 2. Sec. 8. This Ordinance will be effective in accordance with the provisions read as follows: However, I of Article XIV of said Ordinance, including delivery to City of the acceptance, opinion of legal counsel, guarantees and other documents as required by said Article XIV, and provided further, however, that it shall become effective only if all of the cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield adopt an ordinance similar to this Ordinance within ninety (90) days after the adoption of this Ordinance. in full force and effect upon adoption and publication. Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Kelly. Sec. 9. Subject to the provisions of Sec. 8 hereof, this Ordinance shall be Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. Attest: am &-)&hi& And Acting City. Clerk ORDINANCE NO: 1121 PROVIDING CATV (CABLE TELEVISION) RELIEF ADOPTED ON SECO READING. Mr. Rosland indicated that the key aspect of this Ordinance is moving the franchise fees from 5 to 3%, giving 2% relief to the Company, and the various cities picking up 1% of the programming. adoption of Ordinance Nos:1121'as follows: Member Bredesen moved *- ORDINANCE NO. 1121 h ORDINANCE ,RELATING TO CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE, OF THE CITY'S CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE i PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATION OF. THE REQUIREMENTS *- THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN: Seci-inn 1. Short Title. This ifrdinance shall be known as the "CATV Relief Ordinance." Sec. 2. Background and Purpose. The City has granted a cable television franchise through the adoption of City Ordinance Code No. 1120, the Cable Communications Ordinance (hereinafter called the "Franchise"). (the "Other Cities") have adopted similar ordinances, all with the same franchise Grantee. powers organization, the City and the Other Cities have undertaken to supervise Grantee's compliance with these ordinances. Grantee has constructed and is operating a cable communications system in City and the Other Cities. experiencing serious financial difficulties and would be unable to pay the franchise fee due and payable on November 1, 1984. Grantee requested a temporary reduction of its Franchise obligations to allow for its financial recovery. City authorized the SWSCC to review Grantee's request and make recommendations for an appropriate response. in analyzing Grantee's financial condition, held several public meetings, and conducted a thorough review .of Grantee's request. Grantee is experiencing serious financial difficulties caused by such adverse factors as higher than anticipated construction and operating costs, lower than projected market penetration, inability to obtain long-term financing at projected rates and other industry, economic and technological changes. SWSCC also concluded that Grantee cannot secure needed refinancing of its long-term debt, cannot continue to provide the present level of service and cannot become an economically viable enterprise unless the City grants a period of relief from some of the requirements of the Franchise. recommends that the City grant temporary amendments to the Franchise, re- ducing the franchise fee payable now and in the future, eliminating the re- quired performance bond, and modifying the provisions for local programming. The cities of Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Hopkins and Richfield 1 Through the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SWSCC") , a joint 1 Since the adoption of the Franchise, Grantee has approached the City indicating that it is I SWSCC retained a financial consultant to assist SWSCC determined that SWSCC 5 /20/ 85 165 In return, Grantee would execute a Performance Agreement providing a means for monitoring Grantee's financial condition, assuring an adequate level of local programming, and providing for certain other matters related to Grantee's requested relief. The City has reviewed SWSCC's recommendations and has con- sidered the option of requiring full payment of the past due franchise fee through use of Grantee's lytter of credit, performance bond, and parent company performance guarantees. Grantee represents, however, that if the City and the Other Cities seek payment of past due franchise fees through resort to such securities, this would only make it more difficult: for Grantee to solve its financial problems and would be counterproductive to any effort to provide relief to Grantee. In adopting this ordinance, the City relies upon the re- presentations of Grantee and seeks to provide a means by which the public can continue to receive approximately the same level of service while affording Grantee a reasonable opportunity for financial recovery. The ultimate pur- pose of this ordinance is to secure, at a later time during the Franchise term, the full public benefits provided for in the Franchise. Sec. 3. Relationship to Cable Communications Ordinance. This ordinance does not permanently amend any provision of the Cable Commission Ordinance (the "Franchise") but provides that certain provisions of that ordinance are modified for a period of time as provided in this Relief Ordinance. Except as expressly modified in this ordinance, the provisions of the Franchise remain in full force and effect. Sec. 4. Definitions. Subdivision 1. The definitions in the Franchise also apply to this ordinance. Subd. 2. In addition, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given them : (1) "Existing indebtedness" means an $18,000,000 loan made to Grantee to Toronto Dominion Bank of Toronto, Canada under loan documents dated April 1, 1982. (2) "Franchise" means the Cable Communications Ordinance as now or hereafter amended . (3) "Local Programming Obligations" means , for the purpose of this ordinance, Grantee's obligations under the Franchise and the offering for cablecast access, community access and local origination programming. (4) "Performance Agreement" means a contractual agreement between Grantee, City and SWSCC, providing a means for monitoring Grantee's financial condition, assuring an adequate level of local programming, and providing for certain other matters related to Grantee's requested relief. Sec. 5. Relief Granted. While this ordinance is in effect, the obligations of Grantee are modified to the extent provided in this section. Subdivision 1. Franchise Fees - Percentage. I Commencing with Grantee's fiscal year, 1985, the annual franchise fee is re- duced from 5% of Gross Revenues to 3%. Such annual fees shall be paid to City in equal quarterly payments on or before the first day of each of the months of November, February, May and August next following the end of Grantee's fiscal year. the franchise fee shall be restored to the rate of 5% of Gross Revenues at the end of the calendar month in which termination occurs. The restored rate of 5% and the reduced rate of 3% shall be applied respectively to the Gross Revenues collected only in the months during which each rate was in effect. The fees accruing at the restored rate shall be paid in accordance with the terms of the Franchise. Subd. 2. Past Due Franchise Fees. The 1984 franchise fee in the amount of $103,055 payable on or before November 1, 1984, shall be deemed fully discharged and paid if, but only if, Grantee pays the sum of $61,833 to the City, in four equal payments on or before June 1, June 15, August 15 and October 15, 1985. Subd. 3. Letters of Credit. The City Council may by resolution reduce the required amount of the Letter of Credit below $50,000 if in its sole discretion it determines that a lesser amount is reasonable and adequate to protect the public. resolution, require the amount of the Letter of Credit to be increased or fully restored to the amount of $50,000. ment within sixty days after written notice has been given by the City. Subd. 4. Performance Bond. The Grantee may dispense with the $300,000 performance bond required by the Franchise. The City Council may thereafter by resolution require that such bond, or a similar bond in a lesser amount, be provided by Grantee. Grantee shall comply with this requirement within sixty days after written notice has been given by the City. Subd. 5. Local Programming Obligations. Grantee shall expend at least 1% of its annual Gross Revenues each fiscal year in fulfilling its Local Programming Obligations under the Franchise for public, governmental, and educational access, but it shall not be obligated to expend If this ordinance terminates during any of Grantee's fiscal years, The fees accruing at the reduced rate shall be paid in equal , quarterly installments in accordance with the terms of this ordinance. I It may thereafter, by I Grantee shall comply with this require- c 5120185 more than that amount for such access. costs of operation or administration not directly related to the provision of local programming. Grantee's total Local Programming Obligations during the period of this ordinance. Sec. 6. Automatic Termination of Relief Ordinance Provisions. The provisions of this ordinance, and the relief herein granted, shall cease to be effective, automatically, upon the occurrence of the earliest of any of the following events: Subdivision 1, Failure of the Grantee to complete refinancing its Existing Indebtedness by December 31, 1987, in accordance with Article 11, Section 4 of the Franchise. Subd. 2. The end of the next month after Grantee has collected cumulative Gross Revenues in the amount of one hundred million dollars as measured from September 1, 1984. The determination of cumulative Gross Revenues shall be based upon audited financial statements for periods for which they are available and upon Grantee's operating reports for periods for which audited statements are not then available. financial statements and financial operating reports promptly after they are prepared. Subd. 3. March 1, 1992. Subd. 4. Payment, discharge, or satisfaction of the Existing Indebtedness, except through refinancing as provided in Article 11, Section 4 of the Franchise. Subd. 5. Payment, discharge, or satisfaction of the indebtedness arising from the refinancing provided in Article 11, Section 4 of the Franchise. Subd. 6. of the Letter of Credit as provided in Article VLII, Section 4, paragraph H of the Franchise. Subd. 7. Subd. 2 of this ordinance. Subd. 8. Failure of the Grantee to restore, replace or increase either a Letter of Credit or bond within sixty days of written notice by the City, as provided in Section 5, Subdivisions 3 and 4 of this ordinance. Subd. 9. A holding or determination by any court or.agency that any term, condition or provision of this Relief Ordinance is invalid or unenforceable, as a result of any action taken by Grantee or any one acting on Grantee's behalf seeking such determination. Subd. 10. person or entity other than a parent, subsidiary, related corporation, affiliated corporation, partner or joint venturer of Grantee or any parent of Grantee. Subd. 11. Termination of the Franchise. Sec. 7. Other Terminations. This ordinance may also be terminated for cause, under the same procedures for termination as are contained in the Franchise, for the following reasons: Subdivision 1. All grounds for termination provided in the Franchise, except - ordinance. Subd. 2. The purchase by Grantee, its general partner, or any parent, sub- sidiary, affiliate or other related corporation of Grantee or its general partner, of a cable communications system of any part thereof or interest therein, located within the seven-county metropolitan area as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.121, Subd. 2. For this purpose, the definition of a cable communications system shall be as that term is currently defined by the Board. Such a purchase shall not be grounds for termination of this ordinance; however, if the Grantee demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the City that the purchase (1) will not impair the operating cash flow or financial position of Grantee and (2) will involve independent financing of the purchase without resort to the assets of the System. Subd. 3. Failure of the Grantee to comply with any of the provisions of the Performance Agreement. Sec. 8. Requests for Further Relief. No request by the Grantee for any further relief from the requirements of the Franchise, including a request for an extension of the term of this ordinance, shall be considered by the City unless that request is made in writing prior to September 1, 1990. The City shall have no obligation whatsoever to con- sider or grant any such request, and any response to such request shall be at the sole discretion of the City. Sec. 9. Acceptance of This Relief Ordinance; Providing of Guarantees. This ordinance shall be effective in accordance with the provisions of Article XIV of the Franchise including delivery to the City of the acceptance, opinion of legal counsel, guarantees and other documents as required by said Article XIV; provided further, however, that it shall become effective only if all of the Other Cities adopt an ordinance similar to this ordinance within That amount shall not include any This expenditure shall be in complete satisfaction of Grantee shall provide City with its Failure of the Grantee to restore or replace the full required amount Failure of the Grantee to pay the fees as required in Section 5, Sale or transfer of all or substantially all of the System to a I to the extent that Grantee's performance obligations are modified in this i. i I I i I 5 120185 16'7 90 days a,:er adoption of this ordinance. Aso, this ordinance shall not become effective until Grantee, City, SWSCC and the Other Cities have executed and delivered the Performance Agreement and contractual documents attached thereto as exhibits. Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner,Courtney Ordinance adopted. Attest: zh-c5w7 &I&/& Acting City Clerk PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT WITH ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS APPROVED. Member Bredesen intro- duced the following resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the Mayor and Manager be and they RESOLUTION I 4 0 co 0 5 m are hereby directed and authorized to execute a Performance Agreement between Rogers Cable-Systems of Minnesota Limited Partnership, Rogers U. S. Cablesystems, Inc., the City of Edina and the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager, upon their approval thereof, be authorized to also execute Exhibit A - Contract for Local Programming Facilities and Exhibit B - Contract for Public, Educational and Government Access Service. ADOPTED this 20th day of May, 1985. Motion for adoption of this resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 812-A2 (REGULATING CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF RADIO AND TELE- VISION ANTENNAS, EXTERIOR DISH ANTENNAS, AND SUPPORTING TOWERS) DISCUSSED AND CONTINUED TO JUNE 3, 1985. Mr. Rosland reminded Council that at the last meeting this ordinance and considered amendments were discussed. This discussion was centered around setbacks for dish antennas. The ordinance, as written, requires antennas to maintain the same setbacks required for accessory buildings, which are five feet from the interior side and five feet from the rear property line. Mr. Rosland reported that if the Council should desire to increase the required setbacks, staff would recommend a ten-foot interior side yard setback and a 25-foot rear yard setback, which are the setback requirements for principal structures in the Zoning Ordinance. Member Turner supports the original ordinance; she felt that if there were more stringent setbacks for the dishes, it treats them differently than other similar kinds of accessory items that we allow in yards. supports the ordinance as requiring antennas to maintain the same setbacks required for accessory buildings. (At this point, Member Richards returned.) commented that at the present time the City is having trouble restricting antennas' location on property; it is difficult to keep them off the rooftops. Richards would support making the ordinance altogether more restrictive. being no further discussion, Member Richards' motion to continue discussion of Ordinance No. 812-A2 to June 3, 1985 was seconded by Member Bredesen. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Courtney Nays: -Kelly, Turner Motion carried. Member Bredesen Planner Larsen Member There RESOLUTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF $12,000,000 HOSPITAL SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS ADOPTED. Mr. Rosland explained that the City has been working with Fairview Community Hospitals regarding strengthening the Paramedic Program and Emergency Medical Services. Fairview wants to continue to work with the City of Edina in any way that they can to expand the relationship. Council ' Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: .. . 3 RESOLUTION RELATING TO HEALTH CARE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1985A (FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY HOSPITALS PROJECT) AND A BANK REVENUE BOND, SERIES 19858 (FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY HOSPITALS PROJECT); AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER . 474, AS AMENDED, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXE- CUTION AND DELIVERY OF DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO. . BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota (the City), as follows : Section 1. Authorization and Recitals. 1.01, General Authority. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (the Act), to issue its revenue bonds to finance projects consisting ! I I 1 ! 1 I I I i I I I i ! ! I 1 I 5 120185 of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise, whether or not operated for profit, engaged in providing health care services, including, without limitation, hospitals, nursing homes and related medical facilities. Minnesota non-profit corporation which OT~S and operates an acute care hospital in the City known as Fairview Southdale Hospital (the Hospital), has proposed that the City, acting under and pursuant to the Act, issue and sell its Health Care Revenue Bonds, Series 19858 (Fairview Community Hospitals Project) (the Program Bonds),for the purpose of defraying the costs of a project (the Project) consisting generally of the acquisition and installation of items of equipment in the Hospital and the refinancing of outstanding indebtedness of Fairview incurred in the acquisition or betterment of the Hospital. 1.03. Prior Authority. On April 15, 1985, this Council adopted a resolution giving preliminary approval to the financing of the Project and authorizing pre- paration of necessary documents. 1.04. Documentation. Forms of the following documents relating to the financing of the Project have been prepared and submitted to this City and are hereby directed to be filed with the City Clerk: the City will loan the proceeds of the Bonds to Fairview and Fairview agrees to complete the Project and make payments sufficient to pay the principal of, pre- mium, if any, and interest on the Bonds (as hereinafter defined) as the same be- come due and payable; 1.02. Proposed Project and Bonds. Fairview Community Hospitals (Fairview), a I (a) An Agreement (the Agreement) between the City and Fairview pursuant to which (b) An Indenture of Trust (the Indenture) between the City and Mellon Bank, N. A., as trustee (the Trustee), providing for the issuance of the Bonds and for their payment; (the Insurer) and the City, pursuant to which payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds will be insured by the Insurer under an insurance policy, a surety bond and a program fee surety bond (the Commitment Agreement); (d) A Declaration of Trust by Mellon Bank, N. A. (the Declaration Trustee) under which the Program Bonds will be deposited along with the bonds of other tax- exempt issuers for the benefit of the owners of Czrtificates of Participation in the trust; ation, acting by its New York Branch (the Bank) and the City pursuant to which a letter of credit will be issued by the Bank to the Declaration Trustee, to secure payment, under certain circumstances, of the purchase price of Certificates of Participation tendered by the owners thereof and not remarketed, and providing for the issuance by the City to the Bank of a bond (the Bank Bond) to evidence the City's obligations to the Bank (the Program Bonds and the Bank Bond are referred to as the Bonds); (f) A Letter of Credit to be issued by the Bank for the account of the City (the Le-iter of Credit) ; (g) ,k Guaranty by Fairview under which Fairview will guaranty to the Bank the obligation of the City under the Letter of Credit Agreement; .(h) A Placement Agreement by and between the Declaration Trustee, InterHealth, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (the Servicer), the Bank and The First Boston Corporation (the Agent) (the Placement Agreement), whereby the Agent will place tendered Certificates of Participation; (i) A Tender Agent Agreement by and between the Declaration Trustee, the Bank, the Servicer and the Agent (the Tender Agent Agreement), whereby the Agent will receive any tendefed Certificates of Participation; Underwriter) and the City (the Bond Purchase Agreement), whereby the Underwriter agrees to purchase the Program Bonds from the City; Declaration Trustee (the Certificate Placement Agreement), whereby the Under- writer agrees to act as agent in offering the Certificates of Participation to qualified investors; and Certificates of Participation to qualified financial institutions. (c) A Commitment Agreement by and between Municipal Bond Insurance Association (e) A Letter of Credit Agreement between Credit Suisse, a Swiss banking corpor- (j) A Bond Purchase Agreement by and between The First Boston Corporation (the (k) A Certificate Placement Agreement by and between the Underwriter and the (1) A Private Placement Memorandum, whereby the Underwriter will offer the Section 2. Findings. It is hereby found, determined and declared that: (a) The Project, as defined herein and in the Agreement, constitutes a project authorized by the Act; (b) The Project is in the publ'ic interest. and the effect thereof will be to promote the health and public welfare by the attraction, encouragement and de- velopment of hospital and medical facilities at a location which is accessible to the residents of the City; I .. I 5 /20/85 4 0 m 0 m 5 169 (e) The Project is to be located within the City, at a site which is readily accessible to employees and persons seeking medical care residing within the City and surrounding area; (d) The issuance and sale of the Bonds, the loan of Program Bond proceeds for the Project, the execution and delivery by the City of the Agreement, the Inden- ture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and the performance by the City of all covenants and agree- ments of the City contained in the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and of all other acts and things required under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to make the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds valid and binding special or limited obligations of the City in accordance with their terms, are authorized by the Act; forth in the Indenture, under the provisions of which the City will grant a security interest in the Agreement and the payments thereunder to the Trustee as security for the payment of the principal, premium of, if any, and interest on the Bonds and the City has not heretofore pledged, assigned or otherwise encumbered its interest in the Agreement; be sufficient to provide for prompt payment of principal of and interest on all Bonds issued under the Indenture when due; and the Agreement also provides that Fairview is required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance of the Project, including, but without limitation, adequate insurance thereon; (g) Under the provisions of the Act and as provided in the Agreement and the Indenture, the Bonds are not to be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the City other than the revenue pledged to the payment thereof; the City is not subject to any liability thereon and no holders of the Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing powers of the City to pay any of the Bonds or the interest thereon nor to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City; the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encum- brance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City except its interest in the Agreement; each Bond issued under the Indenture shall recite that the Bonds, including interest thereon, are payable solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof; and no Bond shall constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, charter or statutory limitation; (h) The execution and delivery of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commit- ment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds will not conflict with, or constitute on the part of the City a breach of or a default under, any existing agreement, indenture, mortgage, lease or other instrument to which the City is subject or is a party or by which it is bound; provided that this finding is made solely for the purpose of estopping the City from denying the validity of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement or the Bonds by reason of the existence of any facts contrary to this finding; Council, threatened against the City questioning the organization or jurisdiction of the City or the right of any officer of the City to hold his or her office, or in any manner questioning the right and power of the City to execute and deliver the Bonds, or otherwise questioning the validity of the Bonds or the execution, delivery or validity of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement or questioning the appropriation of revenues to payment of the Bonds or the right of the City to loan the proceeds of the Bonds to Fairview; (j) All acts and things required under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota to make the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds the valid and binding special or limited obligations of the City in accordance with their terms will have been done upon adoption of this Resolution and execution of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds; provided that this finding is made solely for the purpose of estopping the City from denying the validity of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement or the Bonds by reason of the existence of any facts contrary to this finding; and (k) The City is duly organized and existing under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota and is authorized to issue the Bonds in accordance with the Act. (e) It is desirable that the Bonds be issued by the City upon the terms set I (f) The payments which Fairview will be required by the Agreement to make will (i) No litigation is pending or, to the best knowledge of the members of this ’ 51 20185 170 Section 3. Authorization and Approval of the Project, Agreement, Indenture, Commitment Agreement, Letter of Credit Agreement, Bond Purchase Agreement and Private Placement Memorandum. The forms of Agreement, Inqenture, Commitment Agreement, Letter of Credit Agree- ment and Bond Purchase Agreement are approved, subject to such modifications as are deemed appropriate and consented to by the Mayor or the City Manager, which consent shall be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commitment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds by the Mayor or the City Manager. the City Manager is directed to execute the Agreement, the Indenture, the Commie- ment Agreement, the Letter of Credit Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement. The Council authorizes the distribution of the Private Placement Memorandum with such variations, insertions and additions as the Mayor or the City Manager may hereafter deem appropriate by the Underwriter to prospective purchasers of the Certificates. Copies of all the documents shall be delivered, filed and recorded as provided therein. The Mayor or the City Manager is also authorized and directed to execute such other instruments as may be required to give effect to the transaction herein contemplated. The Mayor or Section 4. The Bonds; Sale and Execution. 4.01. Authorization and Sale. The City hereby authorizes the issuance of the Bonds in the principal amount not to exceed $12,000,000 in the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture and this Resolution, the final amount to be approved by the Mayor or the City Manager. initial interest rate on the Program Bonds has not been determined and is not contained in the form of the Indenture. to approve the initial interest rate, provided that such rate is not in exess of 10% per annum. Such approval shall be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery by the Mayor or the City Manager of the Indenture. The sale of the Program Bonds to the Underwriter at a price not less than 95% of the principal amount thereof is hereby approved. other officer of the City, by facsimile signatures, are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Bonds as prescribed herein and in the Indenture and to deliver them to the Trustee, together with a certified copy of this Resolution, the other documents required in the Indenture, and such other certificates, documents and instruments as may be appropriate to effect the transaction herein contemplated. various documents referred to above includes an approval of such modifications thereto, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and are consented to by the Mayor and the City Manager. of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. the City Manager, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be execu’id, may be executed by any officer of the City who, in the opinion of the City Attorney, may execute such documents. It is recognized by the City that the The Mayor or the City Manager is authorized 4.02. Execution. The Mayor or any acting Mayor and the City Manager or any 4.03. Modifications, Absence of Officers. The approval hereby given to the The execution In the absence or disability of the Mayor or Section 5. Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor and the City Manager and other officers of the City are authorized and directed to furnish to the Trustee, Fairview and bond counsel certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers’ custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. Section 6. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Bonds, the Agreement, the Indenture Limitations of the City’s Obligations. or any other documents referred to in Section 1.04 hereof, the Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation, and shall not be payable from nor charged upon any funds other than the revenue pledged to the payment thereof, and the City shall not be subject to any liability thereon, and no holder of the^Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Bonds or the interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City other than those rights and interest of the City under the Agreement which have been pledged to the Trustee by the Indenture, and the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City other than those rights and interests of the City under the Agreement which have been pledged to the Trustee by the Indenture. The agreement of the City to perform d 0 the covenants and other provisions contained in this Resolution, the Bonds, the Agreement or the Indenture and the other documents listed in Section 1.04 hereof shall be subject at all times to the availability of revenues sufficient to pay all costs of such performance or the enforcement thereof, and the City shall not be subject to any personal or pecuniary her than as stated above. Adopted this 20th day of May, 1985. Attest: I =smm Acting City,Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Bredesen and, upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney;,, and the following voted against the same:. none; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by 'the Mayor, which signature was attested by the City Clerk. CLAWS PAID. of the following claims as Pre-List dated 5/20/85: Park Department, $14.04; Art Center, $2,232.40; Swimming Pool Fund, $72.60; Golf Course Fund, $16,232.49; Recreation Center Fund, $4,457.23; Gun Range Fund, $265.34; Utility Fund, $36,657.02; Liquor Dispensary Fund, $90,592.81; Construction Fund, $3,632.47; IMP Bond Redemption Fund, $13,218.00; IMP Bond Redemption #2, $150.00; Total, $440,728.07; and for confirmation of the following claims dated 4/30/85: General Fund, $115,177.05; Park Fund, $2,002.08; Art Center, $878.09; Swimming Pool Fund, $2,941.33; Golf Course Fund, $3,520.52; Recreation Center Fund, $8,173.49; Gun Range Fund, $375.04; Utility Fund, $19,891.20; Liquor Dispensary Fund, $226,101.21; Total, $379,060.55. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner for payment General Fund, $273,203.67; Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. There being no further business, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 1O:OO P. M. 3Ltsm rnh/PA Acting City Clerk '.