Agenda Packets - 2006/03/27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council March 13, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 11 Councilmember Thomas asked why the area north of Silver Lake Road is being considered. She 1 stated that area is unsuited being that is all high density and residential housing, with very minor 2 amounts of business. She stated it is a very inappropriate location to be putting billboards. 3 4 Councilmember Thomas stated she was uncomfortable with the maximum height of 45 feet 5 anywhere signs are allowed, even though it may be appropriate in certain locations. She stated 6 there is a big difference between Interstate 35W and residential areas. 7 8 Councilmember Thomas referenced the language about the removal of the sunset provisions, and 9 stated she is surprised that Clear Channel brought it up yet again considering the last six years of 10 negotiations that have gone on regarding sunset provisions and the timelines, and how unwilling 11 the Council was to even go 30 years. She stated more limitations are needed. 12 13 Councilmember Stigney asked if the area north of US Highway 10 is one zoning district or if it is 14 PUD. Director Ericson stated it is a PUD zoning district, and an area where billboards are 15 presently allowed. 16 17 Councilmember Stigney stated the billboard height north of Highway 10 is no problem, and 18 asked if there is language that could be added that specifies the locations that can be at 45 feet. 19 Director Ericson stated it would be possible to not change the height maximum for signs and 20 leave it at 35 feet; however, it is one of the modifications requested by Clear Channel. He stated 21 it was not a modification that he felt the Council would dismiss out of hand, which is why he did 22 not put in language the removal of the interim use permit provisions. He stated this is something 23 that could be negotiated, and if there is a location along 35W where visibility is a concern, there 24 are variance provisions that the Council or Planning Commission may consider. He pointed out 25 this is the first reading and an opportunity to consider changes. 26 27 Councilmember Stigney stated he would prefer a variance be requested for all signs higher than 28 35 feet. 29 30 Councilmember Flaherty referenced the sunset provisions, and stated he is surprised it is 31 suggested to waive it, because Clear Channel had stated it would be the same agreement with the 32 original six signs, which were capped at less than 30 years. He stated he is not in favor of doing 33 that, and does not want to saddle future Councils with a perpetual billboard. 34 35 Councilmember Gunn agreed with Councilmember Flaherty. She asked if garage sale signs are 36 being allowed or not. Director Ericson stated that language is being removed from the Code that 37 allows garage and estate sale signs. Councilmember Thomas confirmed that they are not 38 prohibited, but the language is being removed that allows them expressly. 39 40 Councilmember Stigney stated he agrees that the sunset clause should not be removed. He stated 41 the locations on the west side of the City are not appropriate. 42 43 Director Ericson pointed out that the interim use permit provisions are part of the City Code, and 44 the City Code can be modified and amended as future Councils dictate to be necessary. He stated 45