CC 11-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2001 14 . Councilmember Aplikowski asked if the applicant's desire was strong enough to come back with another plan. Mr. Goserud responded in the affirmative. Mayor Probst stated his strong desire was to see a modified proposal go back through the planning process and not straight to the Council. Councilmember Larson stated he would agree with the Mayor. He noted he thinks it would be the best way to proceed. He added that he hoped that in the process the developer would try to work with the neighbors. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to deny request for approval of the plat and request for variances in Planning Case #01-27 for reasons contained in the staff report of November 20,2001, as recommended by Staff. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3. Case #01-23, City of Arden Hills, Sign Ordinance Mr. Parrish explained this is the second reading and consideration of final adoption of the Sign Ordinance. He stated it has elements discussed at the previous work session. He noted there was a limitation on the exemption for religious symbols. He added . there were also elements for the maintenance and repair of signs. Councilmember Larson asked for clarification under Section four in the paragraph that relates to religious symbols. Mr. Parrish responded the Council could omit the "public building" language. Councilmember Larson stated the mention of both types of buildings makes sense. He suggested the language "religious or other symbols". Mr. Filla requested further clarification on the reason for the changes. Mr. Parrish responded there has been some changes in the last couple of years in the regulation of churches. He stated that in the past there had been a blanket exception for religious symbols. He noted this section places two restrictions on the exception. Councilmember Aplikowski asked if this meant no crosses on churches. Mr. Parrish responded no cross could extend beyond the building. Councilmember Aplikowski stated this was un-American. She stated she never intended to affect church steeples. Councilmember Larson stated the original concern was based on lighting on a building. He noted the language was to say the city did not want to regulate religious . symbols unless they were nuisances. He added limits were to be set, for the most part, it was not to regulate them.