Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Approved: May 12, 2014 <br /> <br />CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA <br />CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />MARCH 17, 2014 <br />5:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS <br /> <br /> <br />A. 2014 Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting <br /> <br />City Planner Streff stated that the City Council is being asked to provide input and feedback on <br />the Planning Commission’s draft 2014 Work Plan. In addition, this meeting is intended to be an <br />open dialog and an opportunity to discuss other planning-related items. The City Council may <br />provide feedback to the Planning Commission on their role, ask questions and discuss items of <br />concern. The Planning Commission may provide input to the City Council on important planning <br />items they see in the community and bring up topics of interest or concern. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff reported that the Planning Commission differs from the City’s other <br />committees and commissions in that the purpose and scope of the Commission’s work is largely <br />determined by State Statute. The majority of the Planning Commission Work Plan is dedicated to <br />continuing the work of evaluating and providing recommendations on land use applications, <br />zoning code amendments, and other planning-related items that come before the City. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Thompson reviewed the Planning Commission Work Plan in detail with the Council. <br />She commented that the City was hoping to recruit another Commission member in 2014. <br /> <br />Commissioner Holewa stated that the Commission would like to see the Sign Code more closely <br />aligned to those of neighboring communities. He believed that the most common request s <br />reviewed by the Planning Commission are sign standard adjustments and this could be <br />streamlined by reviewing and making appropriate revisions to the City’s Sign Ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden recommended that the Commission consider the base size for <br />monument signs when the sign standards are reviewed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bartel wanted to see more structure in the sign code as this would provide further <br />guidance to the Commission when reviewing requests for sign standard adjustments. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung believed that even if the Sign Code was amended, there would always <br />be future applicants requesting additional signage. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bartel explained that by making the sign sizes proportionate to building sizes, this <br />would address a number of the requests for sign standard adjustments. He was in favor of <br />temporary sign requests being approved at a staff level.