Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/11/14 AgendaCITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS Regular Meeting of the City Council City Hall 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue AGENDA June 11, 2014 7:00 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER: B. ROLL CALL: LINDSTROM ____ HARRIS ____ GOSLINE ____ LONG ____ MERCER-TAYLOR ____ STAFF PRESENT: FISCHER ____ C. PRESENTATIONS: 1. D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 28, 2014 E. PUBLIC HEARINGS: F. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. General Disbursements through 6/4/2014: $169,225.89 Payroll through 5/31/2014: $15,863.27 2. Approval of City Licenses G: POLICY ITEMS: 1. Cable Franchise Renewal 2. Variance Request-1565 Hamline Avenue H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS: I. COMMUNITY FORUM: J. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS Regular Meeting of the City Council City Hall 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue MINUTES May 28, 2014 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00PM B. ROLL CALL: LINDSTROM _X_ HARRIS _X_ GOSLINE _AB_ LONG _X_ MERCER-TAYLOR _AB_ STAFF PRESENT: FISCHER _X_ TESSER _X_ C. PRESENTATIONS: 1. Katie Roth - Metro Transit A-Line/Snelling BRT Update – CANCELED D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 14, 2014 APPROVED E. PUBLIC HEARINGS: F. CONSENT AGENDA: Pam Harris Moved, Approval 3-0 1. General Disbursements through 5/21/2014: $32,954.40 Payroll through 5/15/2014: $16,018.30 2. Approval of City Licenses 3. Appointment of Shirley Reider to the Neighborhood Commission 4. Appointment of Andrew Temmen to the Fire Department 5. Bulky Waste Recycling Project G: POLICY ITEMS: 1. Acceptance of Park Improvement Study Chuck Long Moved, Approval 3-0 Candace Amberg of WSB & Associates presented a brief update on the recent Park Improvement Study. The Study can be found at www.falconheights.org under the Parks & Recreation tab. 2. Approval of City License – Pamela M. Harris, PLLC Chuck Long Moved, Approval 2-0 (Harris Abstained) 3. Approval of City Licenses – Cyberwares, LLC Chuck Long Moved, Approval 2-0 (Lindstrom Abstained) H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS: Council Member Pam Harris -Provided an update on the May 27th Planning Commission meeting. -Announced that the Planning Commission is looking for two new Commissioners. Council Member Chuck Long -Announced the upcoming Spring Together event at Curtiss Field on Saturday, May 31st from 12-2pm. -Announced that summer recreation programs are still open for registration. I. COMMUNITY FORUM: Deb Wiswell: Stated that the City never communicated with the Curtiss Field neighborhood after the August Park Commission meeting. Asked questions regarding the upcoming Curtiss Field project, and other items related to Curtiss Field. Voiced concerns about the completeness of minutes. J. ADJOURNMENT: 7:26PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION The City That Soars! Item General Disbursements and Payroll Description General Disbursements through 6/4/2014: $169,225.89 Payroll through 5/30/2014: $15,863.27 Budget Impact Attachment(s) General Disbursements and Payroll Action(s) Requested Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council approve general disbursements and payroll. Meeting Date June 11, 2014 Agenda Item Consent F1 Attachment General Disbursements and Payroll Submitted By Roland Olson, Finance Director Families, Fields and Fair __________________________ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION The City That Soars! Item Approval of City Licenses Description The following individual has applied for a Mechanical License for 2014. Staff has received the necessary documents for licensure. 1. Boehm Heating Company 2. Rascher Plumbing & Heating, Inc. Budget Impact Attachment(s) N/A Action(s) Requested Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council approve the 2014 City License Applications. Meeting Date June 11, 2014 Agenda Item Consent F2 Attachment N/A Submitted By Chelsea Petersen, Administrative Coordinator Families, Fields and Fair __________________________ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION The City That Soars! Item Cable Franchise Renewal Description The North Suburban Cable Commission (NSCC), which the City is a member, has been negotiating with Comcast regarding the cable franchise for the past several years. At this meeting, the City Council will need to decide whether to adopt one of two resolutions provided in your packet. The first one would renew the franchise with Comcast pursuant to Comcast’s Proposal. The second would preliminarily deny the franchise renewal with Comcast. The NSCC is recommending that the City Council preliminarily deny Comcast’s franchise proposal. The reasons are many and provided in summary in the packet materials. A representative of the NSCC, will be at the meeting to provide greater clarity regarding the negotiations to date and the reasons behind the Commission’s recommendation to preliminarily deny the franchise renewal with Comcast. In addition, it is anticipated that representatives of Comcast will also be present. Budget Impact N/A Attachment(s) -Resolution 14-12 Renewal of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc, Cable Franchise (Option 1) -Resolution 14-12 Preliminary Assessment that the Comcast of Minnesota, Inc, Cable Franchise should not be renewed (Option 2) -Supplemental materials from the NSCC Action(s) Requested Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council discuss and approve one of the 2 resolutions provided. Meeting Date June 11, 2014 Agenda Item Policy G1 Attachment -(Option 1) Resolution 14-12 Renewal of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc, Cable Franchise -(Option 2) Resolution 14-12 Preliminary Assessment that the Comcast of Minnesota, Inc, Cable Franchise should not be renewed -Supplemental Materials from the NSCC Submitted By Bart Fischer, City Administrator Families, Fields and Fair __________________________ CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS COUNCIL RESOLUTION June 11, 2014 No. 14-12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RENEWAL OF COMCAST OF MINNESOTA, INC., CABLE FRANCHISE WHEREAS, the City of Falcon Heights (the “City”), is a Member City of The North Suburban Cable Commission, d/b/a The North Suburban Communications Commission (the “Commission”), a Joint Powers Commission organized pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59, as amended, and includes the municipalities of Arden Hills, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Little Canada, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Roseville, St. Anthony, and Shoreview, Minnesota (hereinafter, collectively the “Member Cities”); and WHEREAS, a Joint Powers Commission organized pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59 has the statutory authority to “jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties i.e., the Member Cities;” and WHEREAS, the Commission was established by the Amended North Suburban Cable Commission Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Communications System, dated June 1990 (the “Joint Powers Agreement”), to monitor Comcast’s performance, activities and operations under the Franchises and to coordinate, administer and enforce the Member Cities' Franchises, among other things; and WHEREAS, The North Suburban Communications Commission acts on behalf of its Member Cities, including the City, to monitor the operation and activities of cable communications and to provide coordination of administration and enforcement of the franchises of the Member Cities; and WHEREAS, the City enacted an ordinance and entered into an agreement authorizing MediaOne North Central Communications Corp. to provide cable service (the “Franchise”); and WHEREAS, as a result of several transfers of the Franchise, Comcast of Minnesota, Inc., (“Comcast”) currently holds the Franchise in the city; and WHEREAS, Section 626(a)(l) of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended (the “Cable Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)(1), provides that if a written renewal request is submitted by a cable operator during the 6-month period which begins with the 36th month before franchise expiration and ends with the 30th month prior to franchise expiration, a franchising authority shall, within six months of the request, commence formal proceedings to identify the future cable-related community needs and interests and to review the performance of the cable operator under its franchise during the then current franchise term; and 1 WHEREAS, by letters dated October 11, 2010, and November 23, 2010, from Comcast to each of the Member Cities, including this City, Comcast invoked the formal renewal procedures set forth in Section 626 of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546; and WHEREAS, the City and the other Member Cities informed the Commission, by resolution, that they want the Commission and/or its designee(s) to commence, manage and conduct the formal renewal process specified in Section 626(a)-(g) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g), on their behalf; and WHEREAS, the City has affirmed, by resolution, the Commission’s preexisting authority under the Joint Powers Agreement to take any and all steps required or desired to comply with the Franchise renewal and related requirements of the Cable Act, Minnesota law and the Franchises; and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement empowers the Commission and/or its designee(s) to conduct the Section 626 formal franchise renewal process on behalf of the city and to take such other steps and actions as are needed or required to carry out the formal franchise renewal process; and WHEREAS, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2011-02 commencing formal franchise renewal proceedings under Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a), and authorizing the Commission or its designee(s) to take certain actions to conduct those Section 626(a) proceedings; and WHEREAS, the Commission performed a detailed needs assessment of the Member Cities’ and their communities’ present and future cable-related needs and interests and has evaluated and continues to evaluate Comcast’s past performance under the Franchises and applicable laws and regulations, all as required by Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a); and WHEREAS, the Commission’s needs ascertainment and past performance review produced the following reports: The Buske Group’s “Community Needs Ascertainment – North Suburban Communications Commission (Arden Hills, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Little Canada, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Roseville, St. Anthony and Shoreview, Minnesota)” (July 15, 2013) (the “Needs Assessment Report”); Group W Communications, LLC's, telephone survey and report titled “North Suburban Communications Commission Cable Subscriber Survey (September 2011)” (the “Telephone Survey Report”); CBG Communications, Inc.’s, “Final Report - Evaluation of Comcast's Subscriber System, Evaluation of the Existing Institutional Network and Evaluation of PEG Access Signal Transport and Distribution for the North Suburban Communications Commission” (July 2013) (the “Technical Review Report”); Front Range Consulting, Inc.’s, “Financial Analysis of Comcast Corporation 2012 SEC Form 10K” (May 2013) (the “Comcast Financial Report”); and Commission staff’s “Report on Cable- Related Needs and Interests and the Past Performance of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc.,” (July 22, 2013) (the “Staff Report”); and WHEREAS, based on its needs ascertainment, past performance review, best industry practices, national trends in franchising and technology, and its own experience, Commission 2 staff prepared a “Request for Renewal Proposal for Cable Television Franchise” (“RFRP”) that summarizes the Member Cities' and their communities’ present and future cable-related needs and interests, establishes requirements for facilities, equipment and channel capacity on Comcast’s cable system and includes model provisions for satisfying those requirements and cable-related needs and interests; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2013-04, the Commission authorized its Executive Committee, Franchise Renewal Committee, Commission staff and/or Commission designee(s) to take all steps and actions necessary to implement, conduct and engage in the entire formal franchise renewal process set forth in Section 626(a)-(g) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g), and to comply with any and all related federal, state and local laws, regulations, ordinances, orders, decisions and agreements; and WHEREAS, the Commission’s delegation of authority to the Franchise Renewal Committee includes, but is not limited to, the issuance of a staff report and RFRP and the establishment of appropriate deadlines for questions and Comcast’s RFRP response; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the authority delegated by the Commission, the Franchise Renewal Committee, by resolution, terminated the Section 626(a) proceedings required by the Cable Act on July 26, 2013, issued the Staff Report and RFRP to Comcast, effective July 29, 2013, and instructed Commission staff to deliver the Staff Report and RFRP to Comcast no later than July 30, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report and RFRP was delivered to Comcast on July 29, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Commission ratified the issuance of the Staff Report and RFRP by the Franchise Renewal Committee at its August 2013 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Commission and Comcast engaged in informal renewal negotiations pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h) but are currently unable to arrive at mutually acceptable terms, although informal discussions are ongoing; and WHEREAS, the Commission established November 22, 2013, as a deadline for Comcast’s response to the Staff Report and RFRP; and WHEREAS, the Commission and Comcast agreed to extend certain deadlines including the deadline for Comcast to respond to the Staff Report and RFRP and the deadline set forth in 47 U.S.C. 546(c) for the Commission and the Member Cities to accept or preliminarily deny the Comcast Proposal; and WHEREAS, on or about December 20, 2013, Comcast submitted to the Commission its Formal Proposal in response to the Staff Report and RFRP (“Proposal”); and WHEREAS, the Commission published a notice notifying the public that Comcast’s Proposal has been received and was placed on file for public inspection in the Commission’s office, and that written public comments may be submitted to the Commission; and 3 WHEREAS, the Commission held a public hearing on April 17, 2014, and May 1, 2014, on the Comcast Proposal; and WHEREAS, Comcast’s proposal was analyzed by the Commission’s staff, The Buske Group, CBG Communications, Inc., and Front Range Consulting, Inc., each of whom prepared a separate Executive Summary of Comcast’s Proposal (collectively the “Executive Summary Reports”); and WHEREAS, the Executive Summary Reports identify with particularity whether Comcast’s Proposal is acceptable or unacceptable as it relates to the Commission’s Staff Report and RFRP; and WHEREAS, the Commission carefully considered all public comment including that contained within the Staff Report and RFRP, the Proposal and the Executive Summary Reports; and WHEREAS. the Commission, on May 15, 2014, adopted a resolution recommending to the Member Cities that the Member Cities issue a preliminary assessment that the Comcast Franchises should not be renewed; and WHEREAS, despite the Commission’s recommendation, the City, after carefully reviewing Comcast’s Proposal determines the Proposal meets the future cable-related community needs and interests taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS THAT: 1. Each of the above recitals is hereby incorporated as a finding of fact by the City. 2. The City hereby rejects the Commission’s recommendation and renews the Comcast Franchise pursuant to the terms of the Comcast Proposal. 3. The City finds that its actions and the actions of the North Suburban Communications Commission are appropriate and reasonable in light of the mandates contained in federal law including 47 U.S.C. § 546. 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moved by: Approved by: ________________________ Peter Lindstrom Mayor June 11, 2014 LINDSTROM ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________ GOSLINE Bart Fischer HARRIS ____ Against City Administrator LONG June 11, 2014 MERCER-TAYLOR 5 CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS COUNCIL RESOLUTION June 11, 2014 No. 14-12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT THAT THE COMCAST OF MINNESOTA, INC.CABLE FRANCHISE SHOULD NOT BE RENEWED WHEREAS, The City of Falcon Heights (the “City”), is a Member City of The North Suburban Cable Commission, d/b/a The North Suburban Communications Commission (the “Commission”), a Joint Powers Commission organized pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59, as amended, and includes the municipalities of Arden Hills, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Little Canada, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Roseville, St. Anthony, and Shoreview, Minnesota (hereinafter, collectively the “Member Cities”); and WHEREAS, a Joint Powers Commission organized pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59 has the statutory authority to “jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties i.e., the Member Cities;” and WHEREAS, the Commission was established by the Amended North Suburban Cable Commission Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Communications System, dated June 1990 (the “Joint Powers Agreement”), to monitor Comcast’s performance, activities and operations under the Franchises and to coordinate, administer and enforce the Member Cities' Franchises, among other things; and WHEREAS, The North Suburban Communications Commission acts on behalf of its Member Cities, including the City, to monitor the operation and activities of cable communications and to provide coordination of administration and enforcement of the franchises of the Member Cities; and WHEREAS, the City enacted an ordinance and entered into an agreement authorizing MediaOne North Central Communications Corp. to provide cable service (the “Franchise”); and WHEREAS, as a result of several transfers of the Franchise, Comcast of Minnesota, Inc., (“Comcast”) currently holds the Franchise in the City; and WHEREAS, Section 626(a)(l) of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended (the “Cable Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)(1), provides that if a written renewal request is submitted by a cable operator during the 6-month period which begins with the 36th month before franchise expiration and ends with the 30th month prior to franchise expiration, a franchising authority shall, within six months of the request, commence formal proceedings to identify the future cable-related community needs and interests and to review the performance of the cable operator under its franchise during the then current franchise term; and WHEREAS, by letters dated October 11, 2010, and November 23, 2010, from Comcast to each of the Member Cities, including the City, Comcast invoked the formal renewal procedures set forth in Section 626 of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546; and WHEREAS, the City and the other Member Cities informed the Commission, by resolution, that they want the Commission and/or its designee(s) to commence, manage and conduct the formal renewal process specified in Section 626(a)-(g) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g), on their behalf; and WHEREAS, the City has affirmed, by resolution, the Commission’s preexisting authority under the Joint Powers Agreement to take any and all steps required or desired to comply with the Franchise renewal and related requirements of the Cable Act, Minnesota law and the Franchises; and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement empowers the Commission and/or its designee(s) to conduct the Section 626 formal franchise renewal process on behalf of the City and to take such other steps and actions as are needed or required to carry out the formal franchise renewal process; and WHEREAS, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2011-02 commencing formal franchise renewal proceedings under Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a), and authorizing the Commission or its designee(s) to take certain actions to conduct those Section 626(a) proceedings; and WHEREAS, the Commission performed a detailed needs assessment of the Member Cities’ and their communities’ present and future cable-related needs and interests and has evaluated and continues to evaluate Comcast’s past performance under the Franchises and applicable laws and regulations, all as required by Section 626(a) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a); and WHEREAS, the Commission’s needs ascertainment and past performance review produced the following reports: The Buske Group’s “Community Needs Ascertainment – North Suburban Communications Commission (Arden Hills, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Little Canada, Mounds View, New Brighton, North Oaks, Roseville, St. Anthony and Shoreview, Minnesota)” (July 15, 2013) (the “Needs Assessment Report”); Group W Communications, LLC's, telephone survey and report titled “North Suburban Communications Commission Cable Subscriber Survey (September 2011)” (the “Telephone Survey Report”); CBG Communications, Inc.’s, “Final Report - Evaluation of Comcast's Subscriber System, Evaluation of the Existing Institutional Network and Evaluation of PEG Access Signal Transport and Distribution for the North Suburban Communications Commission” (July 2013) (the “Technical Review Report”); Front Range Consulting, Inc.’s, “Financial Analysis of Comcast Corporation 2012 SEC Form 10K” (May 2013) (the “Comcast Financial Report”); and Commission staff’s “Report on Cable- Related Needs and Interests and the Past Performance of Comcast of Minnesota, Inc.,” (July 22, 2013) (the “Staff Report”); and WHEREAS, based on its needs ascertainment, past performance review, best industry practices, national trends in franchising and technology, and its own experience, Commission staff prepared a “Request for Renewal Proposal for Cable Television Franchise” (“RFRP”) that summarizes the Member Cities' and their communities’ present and future cable-related needs and interests, establishes requirements for facilities, equipment and channel capacity on Comcast’s cable system and includes model provisions for satisfying those requirements and cable-related needs and interests; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2013-04, the Commission authorized its Executive Committee, Franchise Renewal Committee, Commission staff and/or Commission designee(s) to take all steps and actions necessary to implement, conduct and engage in the entire formal franchise renewal process set forth in Section 626(a)-(g) of the Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. § 546(a)-(g), and to comply with any and all related federal, state and local laws, regulations, ordinances, orders, decisions and agreements; and WHEREAS, the Commission’s delegation of authority to the Franchise Renewal Committee includes, but is not limited to, the issuance of a staff report and RFRP and the establishment of appropriate deadlines for questions and Comcast’s RFRP response; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the authority delegated by the Commission, the Franchise Renewal Committee, by resolution, terminated the Section 626(a) proceedings required by the Cable Act on July 26, 2013, issued the Staff Report and RFRP to Comcast, effective July 29, 2013, and instructed Commission staff to deliver the Staff Report and RFRP to Comcast no later than July 30, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report and RFRP was delivered to Comcast on July 29, 2013; and WHEREAS, the Commission ratified the issuance of the Staff Report and RFRP by the Franchise Renewal Committee at its August 2013 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Commission and Comcast engaged in informal renewal negotiations pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(h) but are currently unable to arrive at mutually acceptable terms, although informal discussions are ongoing; and WHEREAS, the Commission established November 22, 2013, as a deadline for Comcast’s response to the Staff Report and RFRP; and WHEREAS, the Commission and Comcast agreed to extend certain deadlines including the deadline for Comcast to respond to the Staff Report and RFRP and the deadline set forth in 47 U.S.C. 546(c) for the Commission and the Member Cities to accept or preliminarily deny the Comcast Proposal; and WHEREAS, on or about December 20, 2013, Comcast submitted to the Commission its Formal Proposal in response to the Staff Report and RFRP (“Proposal”); and WHEREAS, the Commission published a notice notifying the public that Comcast’s Proposal has been received and was placed on file for public inspection in the Commission’s office, and that written public comments may be submitted to the Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commission held a public hearing on April 17, 2014, and May 1, 2014, on the Comcast Proposal; and WHEREAS, Comcast’s proposal was analyzed by the Commission’s staff, The Buske Group, CBG Communications, Inc., and Front Range Consulting, Inc., each of whom prepared a separate Executive Summary of Comcast’s Proposal, which are all attached hereto and incorporated herewith as Exhibit A to Attachment 1 (collectively the “Executive Summary Reports”); and WHEREAS, the Executive Summary Reports identify with particularity whether Comcast’s Proposal is acceptable or unacceptable as it relates to the Commission’s Staff Report and RFRP; and WHEREAS, the Commission carefully reviewed Comcast’s Proposal and determined a number of areas where the Proposal fails to meet the future cable-related community needs and interests taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests; and WHEREAS, should Comcast request the commencement of an administrative hearing pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 546(c), the Commission has prescribed Rules for the Conduct of an Administrative Hearing, attached hereto as Exhibit B to Attachment 1, which rules comply with all procedural obligations set forth in 47 U.S.C. § 546(c); and WHEREAS, the Commission carefully considered all public comment including that contained within the Staff Report and RFRP, the Proposal and the attached analysis; and WHEREAS, the Commission, on May 15, 2014, adopted a resolution, attached hereto as Attachment 1, recommending to the Member Cities that the Member Cities issue a preliminary assessment that the Comcast Franchises should not be renewed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS THAT: 1. Each of the above recitals is hereby incorporated as a finding of fact by the City. 2. Attachment 1 and its Exhibits A and B are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth in the body of this Resolution. 3. The City makes a preliminary assessment that the Comcast Franchises should not be renewed. 4. The City preliminarily finds that Comcast’s Proposal fails to meet the Commission and the City’s future cable-related community needs and interests taking into account the cost of meeting such needs and interests. 5. The basis for the City’s preliminary assessment is set forth in Attachment 1, Exhibit A. 6. At any administrative hearing requested by Comcast, the Rules for the Conduct of an Administrative Hearing attached hereto as Attachment 1, Exhibit B will ensure that Comcast is afforded a fair opportunity for full participation, including the right to introduce evidence, to require the production of evidence and to question witnesses. 7. The City finds that its actions are appropriate and reasonable in light of the mandates contained in federal law including 47 U.S.C. § 546. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moved by: Approved by: ________________________ Peter Lindstrom Mayor June 11, 2014 LINDSTROM ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________ GOSLINE Bart Fischer HARRIS ____ Against City Administrator LONG June 11, 2014 MERCER-TAYLOR ATTACHMENT 1 NSCC May 15, 2014 Resolution ATTACHMENT 1, EXHIBIT A ANALYSIS OF COMCAST’S CABLE PROPOSAL TO THE NORTH SUBURBAN COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Commission’s staff, Supplemental Staff Report on The Comcast Formal Proposal for Renewed Franchises with the NSCC Member Cities CBG Communications, Inc. Executive Summary of CBG Communications, Inc.’s Report on the Technical Aspects of Comcast’s Formal Renewal Proposal The Buske Group Executive Summary, Review of Public, Educational, and Government (PEG) Access Aspects of Franchise Renewal Proposal Submitted By Comcast of Minnesota Front Range Consulting, Inc. Executive Summary, FRC’s Review of Comcast’s Formal Renewal Proposal ATTACHMENT 1, EXHIBIT B RULES FOR CONDUCTING ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FOR COMCAST OF MINNESOTA, INC., FRANCHISE RENEWAL Section 1. The Commission hereby establishes procedural guidelines for purpose of the administrative hearing under the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 as follows: A. The Commission shall appoint an administrative law judge (“hearing officer”) to conduct the administrative hearing and issue recommended findings of fact for consideration by the Commission. Comcast and the Commission will jointly determine the process for selecting an administrative law judge, if necessary. The administrative hearing will be conducted, to the extent practicable and consistent with the requirements of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, pursuant to the provisions for administrative hearings in the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act. The specific requirements for the administrative hearing shall be as follows: B. Pre-hearing Discovery: (1) Each side is permitted limited requests for production of documents and twenty (20) interrogatories. With respect to interrogatories, the following rules apply: (a) Interrogatories are to be answered by any officer or agent of either party, who shall furnish such information as is available to the party; and (b) Each interrogatory is to be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is objected to, in which event the objecting party shall state the reasons for the objection and answer to the extent that the interrogatory is not objectionable. All objections shall be stated with specificity and any ground for objection which is not stated in a timely manner is waived unless the party’s failure is excused by the Commission for good cause shown; and (c) Interrogatories will be answered within the timeframe established by the hearing officer; (2) No depositions shall be permitted. (3) The hearing officer will rule on all discovery disputes which may arise. (4) Discovery shall close fifteen (15) days before the administrative hearing. C. Pre-hearing Disclosures: (1) Each side shall disclose to the other the identity of any person who may be used at the hearing to present expert testimony prior to the hearing date. The disclosure must be accompanied by a written report prepared and signed by the expert which shall contain a complete statement of all opinions to be expressed and the basis and reasons therefore; the data or other information considered by the expert informing his or her opinions; and any exhibits to be used as a summary or in support of the opinions so rendered; the qualifications of the witness; the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony of the expert; and a listing of other cases in which the expert has testified at trial within the preceding four (4) years. (2) Exhibits and witness lists will be mutually exchanged one (1) week prior to hearing date. Witness lists will briefly state the subject of the expected testimony of each witness. D. Administrative Hearing: (1) The hearing will be conducted on a date established by the hearing officer; (2) Each side may be represented by an attorney and shall be afforded the opportunity to present relevant evidence and to call and examine witnesses and cross-examine witnesses of the other party; (3) Commission members may not be called as witnesses nor may the Commission’s or Comcast’s legal counsel be called as witnesses. (4) Witnesses will be sworn; (5) The hearing shall be transcribed by a court reporter; (6) The hearing officer will determine evidentiary objections. Strict compliance with the federal rules of evidence will not be necessary. (7) Post-hearing briefs will be permitted in lieu of closing argument. Briefs will be mutually exchanged at a date established by the hearing officer; (8) The hearing officer will issue recommended findings of fact based upon the record of the proceeding and stating the reasons therefore, pursuant to the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended. E. The Commission will review the recommended findings of fact from the hearing officer and will, upon request of the parties, permit oral argument before the Commission not to exceed thirty (30) minutes per party. Thereafter the Commission will issue a written decision recommending to the Member Cities to grant or deny the proposal for renewal pursuant to the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended. Section 2. Neither the Commission’s July 29, 2013, Staff Report and RFRP or Comcast’s December 20, 2013, Proposal have been amended nor modified in any way since the dates submitted. Section 3. The Commission finds that its actions are appropriate and reasonable in light of the mandates contained in federal law including 47 U.S.C. § 546. END OF DOCUMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION The City That Soars! Description A setback variance is requested to allow the building of an addition on the south side of the automobile service business at 1565 Hamline Avenue North. Background 1565 Hamline Avenue North, Falcon Heights, 55108, PIN 222923210161, is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Hamline Avenue and Hoyt Avenue. The legal description is The South half of Lot 3 and all of Lots 1 and 2, Block 8, Cable’s Hamline Heights Addition. The parcel is zoned B-1 Neighborhood Convenience District. The neighborhood predates most of the present City Code, and the auto servicing business, which has been in place since in one form or another since at least 1942, is considered a legally nonconforming use, “grandfathered” at the time the 1993 city code was adopted. The applicant wishes to improve the business by building a ten foot addition on the south side, creating a customer waiting area with accessible rest rooms and other amenities the present building has no room to accommodate. The south side of the building is about 36.5 feet from the property line; the required setback is 30 feet. Therefore, the applicant seeks a setback variance of 3.5 feet in order to build the ten foot addition. The applicant will replace the non-impervious surface lost to the addition by removing pavement and adding landscaped space greater than or equal to the loss at the north end of the property. There will be enough parking left to meet code requirements. Notice of a public hearing on this matter was published in the Roseville Review on May 13 and mailed to owners of property within 350 feet. The hearing was held on Tuesday, May 27, before the Planning Commission. No neighborhood opposition was communicated to staff or at the hearing. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the variance and adopted the staff findings below. Meeting Date June 11, 2014 Agenda Item Policy G2 Title Setback variance for Hamline Hoyt Service at 1565 Hamline Avenue Submitted By Deborah Jones, Zoning and Planning Director Families, Fields and Fair __________________________ Analysis In reference to Section 113-62 Variances, the Planning Commission finds the following: a. That the variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of Chapter 113. The variance requested is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning chapter as stated in Section 113-1. b. That the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variance requested is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that it will not impair or diminish property values or improvements in the area. No change of use is proposed. c. That there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. There are practical difficulties in complying with the letter of Section Section 113- 177 B-1 Neighborhood Convenience District. Although 1565 Hamline is not unique in the city as a lot, it is the only auto service business. It is typical of the City’s B-1 properties in being a long established neighborhood business on a relatively small lot. An attractive and comfortable customer waiting area is an amenity businesses of this type are expected to provide in order to be competitive in today’s market. There is insufficient space inside the existing building to carve out such a space without sacrificing workspace. Due to the arrangement of service bays, the south side of the existing building is really the only option for expanding the building in such a way as to provide the waiting area. d. That the granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. The variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, will have no effect on traffic on the public street and will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. e. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulties. Although the building could be extended about 6.5 feet without encroaching into the required setback (a theoretical minimum: no variance), this would provide an extremely narrow footprint for the type of amenity the applicant wishes to provide. The requested 3.5 foot extension (to allow a 10 foot addition is reasonable. f. The provisions regarding earth-sheltered construction and temporary use stated in Section113-62(e)(6) do not apply to this variance. Budget Impact None Attachment(s) • Application for setback variance for expansion of the auto service business building at 1565 Hamline Avenue, including site maps showing existing configuration, proposed addition and proposed new planted area. • 2011 Aerial photo (Ramsey County GIS) Actions Requested Approve a 3.5 foot setback variance for the south (Hoyt) side of the building at 1565 Hamline Avenue. HOME OF HONEST MECHANICS SCALE:A202 1 EXTERIOR ELEVATION - EAST 3/32" = 1'-0 SCALE:A202 2 EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SOUTH 3/32" = 1'-0 SCALE:A202 3 EXTERIOR ELEVATION - NORTH 3/32" = 1'-0 SCALE:A202 4 EXTERIOR ELEVATION - WEST 3/32" = 1'-0 A202 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Date: Sheet No.: Comm. No.: Drawn By: Issues & Revisions: Sheet Name: File Name: Plot Date: Last Modified: Owner: HONEST 1 AUTO 1565 HAMLINE AVE N FALCON HEIGHTS, MN 2014039 SGB 05/13/2014 1959 Sloan Place, Suite 100 Maplewood, MN 55117 Phone: (651) 487-3281 Fax: (651) 487-3283 NAI-Architects.com RJ GENERAL CONTRACTOR Th i s m a p i s a u s e r g e n e r a t e d s t a t i c o u t p u t f r o m a n I n t e r n e t m a p p i n g s i t e a n d is f o r r e f e r e n c e o n l y . D a t a l a y e r s t h a t a p p e a r o n t h i s m a p m a y o r m a y n o t b e ac c u r a t e , c u r r e n t , o r o t h e r w i s e r e l i a b l e . © R a m s e y C o u n t y E n t e r p r i s e G I S D i v i s i o n 69 . 7 TH I S M A P I S N O T T O B E U S E D F O R N A V I G A T I O N NA D _ 1 9 8 3 _ H A R N _ A d j _ M N _ R a m s e y _ F e e t Fe e t 69 . 7 0 34 . 8 5 Notes Hamline Hoyt Service - 2011 Aerial Photo - Ramsey CountyLegend 15 6 5 H a m l i n e A v e n u e City Halls Schools Hospitals Fire Stations Police Stations Recreational Centers Parcel Points Parcel Boundaries