My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 10-15-1985
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
CC 10-15-1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:12:33 PM
Creation date
11/10/2006 3:08:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
<br /> . <br /> .. ~.. <br /> . <br /> MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Village of Arden Hills <br /> Tuesday, October 15, 1985 - 7:30 p,m. <br /> Village Hall <br /> Call to Order <br /> Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Woodburn called the meeting <br /> to order at 7:30 p.m, <br /> Roll Call <br /> Present: Mayor Robert Woodburn, Councilmembers Dale Hicks, Nancy <br /> Hansen. Gary Peck, Thomas Sather <br /> Absent: None <br /> Also Present: Planner Orlyn Miller, Treasurer Donald Lamb, Public Works <br /> Supervisor Robert Raddatz, Clerk-Administrator Charlotte <br /> McNiesh, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm <br /> . Approval of Minutes <br /> Hansen moved, seconded by Sather, that the minutes of the September 30 <br /> Council meeting be approved as amended, and the addition to the July 8 <br /> Council meeting minutes be approved as submitted, Motion carried unanimously. <br /> (5-0) <br /> Business from the Floor <br /> Paul Malone, 1485 Dawn Circle, referred Council to a transparency of a <br /> New BriRhton Bulletin news article re a mass burn plant proposed in New <br /> Brighton, west of 35W and north of 1-694; asked if Arden Hills should <br /> take action on this proposal; expressed concern because Arden Hills is <br /> downwind of the proposed location. <br /> Woodburn advised that Arden Hills has contacted Metro Council expressing <br /> opposition; noted that the response was that there would be numerous oppor- <br /> tunities to express opposition; understands there has been 'no official' <br /> action taken by New Brighton to date relative to this proposed location. <br /> REPORT OF VILLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER <br /> Case No. 84-31, SiRn Approval - Northpark Business Center, Grey Fox Road, <br /> WoodbridRe Properties <br /> Miller displayed a transparency of proposed Northpark Business Center <br /> signage; reported that the wall-mounted signs are identical to those at <br /> Northpark Corporate Center (County Road E and Pinetree Drive); noted that <br /> the two monument signs, proposed at the east access drive on Grey Fox <br /> Road and at the Highway 51 access drive, are simiJ:ar' t'O:. those at. Northp1lrk.... <br /> Corporate Center but are .slightly wider and shorter (II' wide, 6' high). <br /> Miller reported that verification that the two monument signs meet the <br /> 25 foot required setback is needed; reported that the Planning Commission <br /> recommends approval of the proposed signage, provided no setback variances <br /> are involved. <br /> Hicks moved, seconded by Peck, .that Council approve the Northpark Business <br /> Center signage, as proposed, provided there are no setback variances for <br /> the monument signs, Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) <br /> Case No. 85-17, Minor Subdivision (Lot Split) - Lot 12, Block 3, Shady <br /> Oaks Addition - R. Moder <br /> Council was referred to Planning memo (9/25/85), to Planning Commission <br /> recommendations (minutes of October 2 Planning Commission meeting), and <br /> to a transparency of the proposed split of lot 12, block 3, Shady Oaks <br /> . Addition, <br /> Miller explained that the lot is an exception to the Arden Oaks plat, <br /> but a split of this lot was anticipated when Arden Oaks was platted, Miller <br /> reported that both "lots meet or exceed all dimensional and area require- <br /> ments, and no setback variances are created for the existing house, <br /> Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the <br /> lot split, with the split in line with the lot line to the north and south, <br /> Miller said he does not see this alignment as a critical issue; noted <br /> it does make it neater, but he assumes the lot owner desires to retain <br /> a deeper rear yard for his existing house. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.