Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />February 16, 2000 <br />Page 11 <br />the loss of one sign on the golf course. He suggested they require 500 � cr;'r ' <br />property line. He added that if Sysco was unable to place twa Y�illboarci� �E�' <br />result of this requirement, it would be unfortunate, however,,i#,wduld be �i��- <br />the City. ....�. <br />of the <br />ty as a <br />ion for <br />Commissioner Stevenson stated he would agree with chi�. ��e ir��i`�ated however, �k��: �`i3-y <br />Council has already overruled the Planning Commissioi� v���.1a A�c:�a.rd to the signs, �-�x��� Y3t�� <br />proposing six billboards to generate revenue, which could b� ��;t�����cl io five, in order to allov✓ <br />Sysco to have two billboards. He stated the City would see �c� ��s�r�cxE�� F��;r��=�it from this, except <br />through the permitting process, and would lose this incom� ' <br />Commissioner Berke stated he understood this, how�v��, �������k�er consicl����%t�rt �����that Sysco has <br />been a good neighbor and a taxpayer in the City, ant�'s�tault� f��; �reated fairly. <br />Commissioner Johnson advised that this wo�;ld''equally <br />Commissioner Laube stated this <br />manner. He pointed out that whe <br />and this action would set preced� <br />requirements that apply to the C <br />applicatiox��, �rid this confl��d`t ��as' <br />utiliz� i.:�� �•�solve this �nt��t t�� a <br />propo <br />Commission <br />variance. C <br />�rc�i.�ld not 6� abi� t <br />t����i�s��j l?ointed o; <br />ri�v;;lv�7C�I' �i3�VPY150 <br />�c�x�c�itional: <br />� I'or ih.c; r�.� <br />are th� s�� <br />sen, it �u�i <br />sistent fQ7' <br />�a tllis. <br />>: <br />- .:t� <br />5sion should approach this situation in this <br />; permit is �i'anted, it affects all of the citizens, <br />propos�at. that comes forward. He stated the <br />fox� ��/sco, and now that Sysco has filed an <br />'���,pnined. He stated whatever means they <br />parties, and if they approve this matter, as <br />�;�sco would then come before the City to request a <br />;�l tk�at they might then have to consider a lesser spacing <br />n�issioner Johnson �-�;�.t�;r�i�r� �}►at they could require the signs be set back 500 feet from the <br />�ierty lines. Commiss;i�n�� Stevenson explained that they would not need to be this specific, <br />ause allowing the t�o Sysco billboards would not interfere with any other billboards. He <br />ed Ordinance 644,;���ii 637 are applicable only to this specific area, and these billboards. He <br />�a�ed they woult� r�ot have to amend the Code, but rather, could be very specific that the signs <br />>OQ feet from th�"property lines, in this case. <br />�i,�i�°p��'�c��c Peterson stated a 500-foot property line distance restriction would effectively limit <br />�ysco 'co only one sign, therefore, it would not necessarily assist in this situation. Commissioner <br />Hegland pointed out that such a restriction would be consistent for everyone, in that the City <br />would lose one billboard, as well. <br />Chairperson Peterson stated the northernmost sign on the Interstate 35W corridor is outside of <br />the City's jurisdiction, in terms of the sign spacing requirement. Commissioner Hegland advised <br />