Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />to <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />Mounds View City Council November 12, 2013 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />they have agreed to this subdivision. Planning Associate Heller reviewed a proposed easement as <br />well. <br />Planning Associate Heller reviewed the request in further detail and noted the City Attorney had <br />reviewed the survey. Staff explained the Planning Commission reviewed this item at their <br />October 16, 2013 meeting and recommended approval. <br />Council Member Meehlhause questioned who would own the property within the easement. <br />Planning Associate Heller explained Mr. Engberg would not own the property but the easement <br />would allow him access to the property if repairs were necessary to the drainage system. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Hull/Meehlhause. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 8169, <br />Approving a Minor Subdivision (Lot Line Adjustment) at 3030 & 3032 County Road J. <br />Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. <br />B. Resolution 8170, Reapproving the Coventry Senior Living Final Plat. <br />Planning Associate Heller requested the Council reapprove the Coventry Senior Living final plat <br />for an additional six months. She explained Coventry Senior Living was hoping to have footings <br />in the ground before winter. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Meehlhause. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 8170, <br />Reapproving the Coventry Senior Living Final Plat. <br />Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. <br />C. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 884, Amending Chapter 1008 <br />Regarding Ground Signs and Nonconforming Signs. <br />Planning Associate Heller stated the Planning Commission and City Council have started <br />focusing on enhancing the County Road 10 corridor. This has involved discussions on the <br />general development to improve the visual appeal of the corridor. One idea has been to change <br />the style and height allowances of the signage in the corridor to monument style signs, and to <br />reduce the 15 -foot setback amount along County Road 10. <br />Planning Associate Heller explained the Planning Commission discussed the sign code changes <br />at their last few meetings and was in favor of amending the sign code rather than having specific <br />requirements for the corridor. Staff reviewed the proposed sign code amendments in detail and <br />explained the Planning Commission recommended approval of amending Chapter 1008 <br />regarding ground signs and nonconforming signs. <br />Council Member Gunn asked if monument style signs would fit into the easement along the <br />County Road 10 corridor given the fact the corridor now had a trail. Planning Associate Heller <br />explained the monument style signs would fit in the easement. <br />