CCP 11-27-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HlLLS PLAl\'NT'lG COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 1,2000 8 This Plarnling Case will be reviewed at the Monday, November 27,2000, City Council meeting, . PLANNING CASE # 00-39 - CITY OF ARDEN HILLS - RIGHT OF WAY ORDINANCE (REVIEW) Ms. Chaput stated that the City of Arden Hills rcquests review of a model right-of-way ordinance for future adoption. Ms. Chaput statcd that at a previous Council worksession, she was made aware of the fact that the City does not have a right-of-way ordinancc and that the Planning Commission should make it a priority in their workplan. Since that time, the Planning Commission determined the immediate need for a right-of-way ordinance, as shown on thc Planning Commission's work plan. Ms. Chaput stated that the attached model right-of-way ordinance was provided by thc North Suburban Communications Commission, This ordinance has been distributed to all communities within the cable commission arca and is largely based on the League of Mirmesota Cities' model ordinance. This ordinance is the result of a cooperative effort between the City Engineer Association of Minnesota and the League of Minnesota Cities, thoroughly reviewed by an attorncy for the North Suburban Communications Commission, Ms. Chaput stated that the purposc of the modcl ordinance is to give cities a uniform sct of regulations to hclp them govcrn the use of their rights-of-way. It is intended to provide a single set of regulations that citics can apply to all right-of-way users, including telecommunications companies. The ordinance confornlS to the provisions of thc new telecommunications right-of- way legislation adoptcd into law as Minn. Session Laws 1997, chapter 123. In particular, the ordinance implements a city's authority to manage its right-of-way and to recover its actual costs incurred in managing excavations and/or obstructions within the right of way, . Ms. Chaput stated that Staff recommends that thc Planning Connnission review this document before and during thc mecting and direct staff to makc changes as appropriate. If acceptable, the document will come before the Planning Commission at thc December 5 meeting for a public hcaring. Chair Erickson asked whether any other communities have adoptcd the ordinance as written. Ms. Chaput stated that City Attorneys will often adopt some of the language, adding that the main documents are often similar, She added that she had provided a copy of thc model ordinance to Mr, Filla, who indicated it did not vary enough to require any major changes. She not cd that Mr. Filla suggested the City Engineer might review thc document. Chair Erickson asked whether any other City staff had reviewed the document. Ms. Chaput stated that she received the model ordinance too late for anyone to review it thoroughly. Commissioncr Baker stated that the City of Mirnleapolis had recently had issucs with the inability to control multiple worksites simultaneously, He added that he had not seen anything in . the model ordinance to prevcnt this and requirc utilities companies to coordinate efforts. Ms. Chaput agreed there was no scetion in thc model ordinance regarding this issue.