My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-14-15-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
12-14-15-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/15/2015 4:11:55 PM
Creation date
12/15/2015 4:08:26 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – December 9, 2015 4 <br /> <br />Chair Thompson agreed that developers would work with staff in order to find clarity and <br />understanding on the City’s required park dedication and park development fees. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jones asked if a multi-use building would be charged separate rates for its <br />residential and commercial space. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher stated this was the case and that the fees would <br />be prorated based on the percentage of each use. <br /> <br />Commissioner Holewa asked if the proposed Ordinance had been brought to the JDA. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher indicated that the proposed Ordinance was <br />discussed in general, but noted this was a City-wide policy that did not require JDA approval. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. <br /> <br />Chair Thompson invited anyone for or against the application to come forward and make <br />comment. <br /> <br />There being no comment Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. <br /> <br />Commissioner Holewa moved and Commissioner Neururer seconded a motion to <br />recommend approval of Planning Case 15-023 to amend Section 1130.08 of the City <br />Subdivision Code pertaining to public use dedications, as presented in the December 9, <br />2015, report to the Planning Commission. The motion carried 5-1 (Zimmerman opposed). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.