Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – MARCH 21, 2016 12 <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes agreed there is limited staff flexibility as currently the only flexibility is <br />whether or not the proposed change must go back to the Planning Commission for review. She <br />said she too would like to see more flexibility for City staff if the proposed change is in more <br />conformity with City Code and she recommended further review. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden stated that City staff should not be put in a position in which they <br />approved a change in the field that the Council did not approve of. She said that the Code was <br />acceptable as currently written. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung stated staff time would be better spent on preparing for organized <br />collection in the TCAAP area. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant stated that as only two requested changes have been presented to the Council, he <br />does not know if this is a problem at this point in time. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik indicated that if another city adopts an amended code regarding <br />administrative approvals, he would update the Council. <br /> <br />G. Update on Supreme Court Decision Regarding Signs <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik discussed the Supreme Court decision which overturned an Arizona city’s <br />sign code. He stated it was recommended that cities throughout the nation review their sign code <br />and remove content based provisions. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik stated it was anticipated a model sign code would be provided by the <br />National Association of City Attorneys. To date he had received six drafts of that code but not a <br />final recommendation. He expected there to be future changes to the recommendations by the <br />National Association of City Attorneys. He discussed various types of signs and noted those that <br />are acceptable in the right-of-way, on premises, and off premises. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik noted that this issue pertained to banners, balloons, and any physical <br />structure that had a representation of speech, either printed or by artwork. He stated the City <br />could still enforce the number of signs and those that are non-content based. <br /> <br />City Attorney Jamnik recommended a change to the City’s sign code should not be included in <br />the 2016 Work Plan. He said that as more information became available, he would provide an <br />update. He stated if the City encountered an enforcement issue regarding a sign, it would be best <br />to try to obtain voluntary compliance. <br /> <br />H. Building Permit Follow-Up <br /> <br />Community Development Director Hutmacher indicated the number of permits issued in 2015 <br />as well as the construction value associated with those permits had increased over the prior two <br />years. To date in 2016, the City had issued 225 permits, which was more than those issued to date <br />during each of the past 4 years. She stated that at the end of 2015, the number of open permits was <br />less than the eight-year average and said that permits less than two years old are considered to be <br />active. Currently there are no permits older than three years.