Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL '. NOVEMBER 13,2006 3 <br /> eval uated further. She reviewed stairs recommendations on how to proceed f()r this ycar's <br />. evcnt. <br /> Mayor Aplikowski stated she would be voting no on this because this was not the purpose of the <br /> Arden Hills Event. <br /> MOTION: Councilmcmber Larson moved and Councilmembcr Pellcgrin seconded a <br /> motion to approve staff s recommcndation regarding the 2007 Celebrating <br /> Arden Hills Event. Thc motion failed (2-3 Councilmembers Grant, <br /> Holden, and Mayor Aplikowski opposed). <br /> C. Motion to Approve Ordinance #381 to Update and Re-codifv the Zooin2 <br /> Re2ulations into Chapter 13: Zonin2 Code of the Official Citv Code of Ordinances <br /> Mr. Lehnhoffrequested Council considcr a motion to approve Ordinance #381 to update and re- <br /> codify the zoning regulations into Chapter 13: Zoning Code of the official City Code of <br /> Ordinances. He reviewcd the changes bcing requcstcd. <br /> Councilmember Larson requested staff add a delinition for noxious weeds. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she had a conccrn regarding the 4/5 votc. She stated that was <br /> the only part she would not support. <br />. Couocilmember Grant stated hc believed thc PUD process should require a 4/5 vote. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she was opposed to all three 4/5 vote. <br /> CouncilmemberLarsoll askcd statl' for an cxplanation as to why this made sense. Mr. <br /> Lehnhoff rcsponded staff was not specifically recommcnding this, but this was one of the cases <br /> where the City currcntly deviates from State Statutcs and that was the reason this was being <br /> proposed as an option. <br /> Mayor Aplikowski stated she believcd this was a good move for the City and when the full <br /> Council was not in attendancc it made it extremely difficult to get the entire Council thinking the <br /> same. She statcd she did not have a problem with this. <br /> MOTION: Councilmember Holdcn moved and Councilmember Grant scconded a <br /> motion to removc Section 1355 items 20, 21, and 22 from Planning Case <br /> 06-034. <br /> City Attomey Filla stated most cities had a 4/5tl1 vote, but it was not rcquired and if they chose to <br /> keep the 3/5111 vote they could. <br /> The motion carried (4-1 Mayor Aplikowski opposed). <br />. <br />