CCP 01-14-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, e . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2001 15 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 fmal 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 t)1Jes 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 ifthis 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. Mr, Parrish stated if a church or other institution was proposing something that deviated from the ordinance, they could go though the process for a variance, Councilmember Aplikowski stated the purpose of the task force was not to eliminate crosses or steeples, but to regulate logos on the sides of buildings,