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
'.