CCP 05-14-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF ARDEN HILLS MEMORANDUM DATE: May 7, 2001 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jennifer Chaput, City Planner( 'i SUBJECT: Planning Case#00-39, City of Arden Hills Right of Way Ordinance Request The City of Arden Hills requests a first review of a model right-of-way ordinance(Exhibit A) at the May 14, 2001 City Council meeting. If appropriate, a public hearing will be held on the proposed ordinance at the June 11, 2001 meeting, followed by adoption at the same meeting. Background As discussed at the April 16 worksession, the model right-of-way ordinance was provided by the North Suburban Communications Commission (NSCC) and is largely based on the League of Minnesota Cities' model ordinance. This ordinance is the result of a cooperative effort between the City Engineer Association of Minnesota and the League of Minnesota Cities, thoroughly reviewed by an attorney for the North Suburban Communications Commission. Additionally, the proposed ordinance has been reviewed by the City Engineer, City Attorney and former Public Works Director. Again,the purpose of the model ordinance is to give cities a uniform set of regulations to help them govern the use of their rights-of-way. It is intended to provide a single set of regulations that cities can apply to all right-of-way users, including telecommunications companies. The ordinance conforms to the provisions of the new telecommunications right-of-way legislation adopted into law as Minn. Session Laws 1997, chapter 123. In particular,the ordinance implements a city's authority to manage its right-of-ways and to recover its actual costs incurred in managing excavations and/or obstructions within the right of way. At the request of the City Council, staff contacted the League of Minnesota Cities to inquire about the success of their model ordinance in metro area cities. The League has stated that the model right- of-way ordinance has been adopted by about thirty metro communities and they have not heard of any significant issues with the ordinance. The League also mentioned that one of the toughest critics of right-of-way ordinances is Xcel Energy and that even their criticisms have not been overly bad. Review The Public Works Director and the City Engineer reviewed the proposed ordinance, providing the following list of comments, corresponding with the page numbers in Exhibit A: 1. Definition of "Business District" (page 3 or 4/32)—should add in "to be subsequently designated" in reference to business districts.