My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-10-25-R
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2025
>
03-10-25-R
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 10:19:19 AM
Creation date
3/17/2025 10:16:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
418
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 – FEBRUARY 10, 2025 7 <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe stated the condition could be worded in such a manner that if the <br />property owner did not consent, it satisfies the condition so staff could move forward and issue <br />permits. <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson indicated she did not support holding this item up, but she also wanted <br />to see if there was a way forward for the sign easement. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant supported the Council having a conversation with the property owner in order to <br />receive the easement. He stated the applicant was asking for signage and the City, as part of the <br />PUD amendment was asking for a sign easement. <br /> <br />Mr. Ferarro commented he was not requesting branded signage but rather was requesting <br />wayfinding signage. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant commented he would be in favor of tabling action on this item, or having approval <br />being contingent upon meeting a condition to receive an easement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden suggested this item be tabled to the February 19 Special City Council <br />meeting. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant supported this recommendation. <br /> <br />Councilmember Weber inquired if the City would deny the sign request if the applicant were to <br />not allow for the sign easement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden explained she could not speculate how people would vote in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson indicated she would not deny the request for lack of an easement. <br /> <br />Councilmember Weber stated he did not believe this was an unreasonable discussion to have. <br />He commented his personal opinion was that he would not hold this item up if the easement were <br />not granted. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rousseau inquired if the request were approved, would the applicant speak with <br />the owner in good faith about the sign easement. <br /> <br />Mr. Ferarro stated he could do this. <br /> <br />Councilmember Monson indicated if the applicant were to say no at this time, there may be an <br />opportunity for a partnership in the future. She reviewed a proposed condition that could be made <br />a part of the motion to read: The applicant shall work with City staff to identify a location for an <br />easement in favor of the City for the purpose of a gateway sign, or combined signs. She <br />commented she was trying to find a way forward in order to not hold this item up. <br /> <br />Mayor Grant reported if a condition were added, the condition would have to be met before the <br />requested CPC/Delkor signs could go up. <br /> <br />City Administrator Jagoe reported this was the case. She explained if the applicant were to say <br />they do not want to grant the City an easement, would this satisfy the condition because they had
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.