CCP 01-14-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2001 II - Mayor Probst stated it did appear that other homes along Edgewater Street appeared closer than the 40 feet required. MOTION: 3. Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Ap1ikowski seconded a motion to approve in Planning Case #01-31 a front yard setback variance, subject to the findings contained in the staff report, The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Case #01-16, City of Arden Hills, Shoreland Ordinance, Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 334 Mr. Parrish explained this the latest in the City's codification effort, He stated there were no changes other than the comments by the City Attorney. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to accept in Planning Case #01-16 the first reading of Ordinance #334, an Ordinance adopting Shoreland management standards within the City of Arden Hills, The motion carried unanimously (5-0), C. 2002 Budget 1. Authorization to Cancel December 17, 2001 Truth-in-Taxation Continuation . Hearing MOTION: Counci1member Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to cancel the December 17, 2001 Truth-in-Taxation Continuation Hearing, as recommended by staff, The motion carried unanimously (5-0). D. New City Code of Ordinances 1. Adoption of City Code of Ordinance 2. Ord.#335, "An Ordinance Summary Adopting a New Municipal Code for the City of Arden Hills, MN, Amending, Restating, Revising, Updating, Codifying and Compiling Certain Ordinances of the City of Arden Hills Dealing with the Subjects Embraced in the Code of Ordinances, and Providing Penalties for the Violations of the Code of Ordinances" 3. Res, #01-24, "Adopting a Schedule of Fees and Charges for Various Services, License and Permits for the City of Arden Hills, MN" Mr. Lynch explained the City Attorney has found that the League of Minnesota Cities and the statutes do not require a publication of a public hearing notice for a re-codification. He stated the city just did a notification for public information and record, He noted there is no 14 or 10 day requirement. Mr. Filla stated the statute that set up the City's right to do this re-codification does not require a public hearing, He noted if the Council intended to adopt parts ofthe City Code that required public hearings because of the Land Planning Act, then the City would have to hold a public hearing. He added the City was not changing the zoning regulations, .