My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-25-07 Minutes for Approval
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
06-25-07-R
>
06-25-07 Minutes for Approval
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/4/2024 12:27:57 AM
Creation date
9/22/2022 10:49:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MAY 21, 2007 6 <br /> A discussion on the meetings ensued. • <br /> Ms. Frick reported a public hearing is scheduled for November 1, 2007;however, it could <br /> be held at any time during the 30-day comment period. She explained a public hearing is <br /> not required to initiate an AUAR; however, it is a good idea. She commented Council is <br /> required to set the boundaries of the AUAR with the understanding that the scenario <br /> could be updated. She explained there must be a Council resolution that formally <br /> initiates an AUAR. She indicated the 120-day clock starts the day an AUAR is ordered <br /> until the final AUAR is issued. <br /> Community Development Director Barton stated an extension could be applied for. <br /> Councilmember Holden asked what happens between June 25 and July 19, 2007. <br /> Ms. Frick replied Council and staff could wait to initiate the AUAR, as long as there is <br /> the understanding that SRF would continue to work on this. She stated that if the <br /> refinement is substantial enough that it should have an updated resolution, it could be <br /> looked at. <br /> Mayor Harpstead questioned if, given that a public hearing is scheduled after that date, <br /> Council could delay a vote authorizing an AUAR until after the public hearing. <br /> Ms. Frick advised the group that the state process states the order does not have to occur • <br /> at that time; however,the work continues. <br /> Councilmember Holmes asked if the resolution made on June 25 must be specific. <br /> Ms. Frick replied it could include a range of language. She commented that what Council <br /> did not want is something more intense or to analyze the wrong things. Ms. Frick asked <br /> Council to look at the key dates. <br /> Community Development Director Barton asked how the timeline would be affected if <br /> the resolution were not done until after July 19, 2007. <br /> Ms. Frick replied it would not be affected. She commented the value of the timeline to <br /> the consultant is to make sure everyone is on the same page. <br /> Councilmember McClung asked Council and staff to look at the dates to make sure they <br /> do not conflict with other items on the calendar. <br /> City Administrator Wolfe stated it would be incorporated into the overall timeline. <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.