Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council July 10, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br /> <br /> 1 <br />Mr. Hall asked if the depreciation was at 35 or 45 feet. Director Ericson responded the Planning 2 <br />Commission felt there was an issue with obstruction at either height. He added that one member 3 <br />of the Planning Commission voted against the variance recommending denial because they 4 <br />believed the billboard may be better at 45 rather than 35 feet. 5 <br /> 6 <br />Mr. Hall asked when the Planning Commission discussed depreciation at 45 feet. He stated the 7 <br />adjoining property owner is okay with the billboard at 45 feet. He appreciated the clarification 8 <br />from Director Ericson. 9 <br /> 10 <br />Ken Glidden, 5240 Edgewood Drive, stated he was at the Planning Commission meeting and 11 <br />there was not much confusion. He recalled that the Interim Use Permit (IUP) was denied and 12 <br />there were two issues on the agenda, one dealing with the height limit. He stated IUP request 13 <br />was denied and Acting Mayor Stigney concurred. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Mr. Glidden pointed out the Planning Commissioners are volunteer citizens and they made the 16 <br />decision that the City has a limit of one billboard on County Road 10. He stated the discussion 17 <br />centered around the issue and therefore, the decision was made to deny the proposed billboard 18 <br />near the Mermaid. 19 <br /> 20 <br />Richard Sonterre, 3225 Spring Street NE, Minneapolis, thanked Mr. Glidden for his comments. 21 <br />He stated Mr. Glidden’s comments are more accurate in terms of the Planning Commission’s 22 <br />rationale for denial. He stated that there was considerable discussion regarding depreciation at 23 <br />the June meeting. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Mr. Sonterre stated the Planning Commission’s concern arose because Mr. Kopas (an adjoining 26 <br />property owner) expressed uncertainty. Mr. Sonterre stated that upon receipt of a letter from Mr. 27 <br />Kopus in July, there was no further discussion at the Planning Commission regarding the 28 <br />valuation of the property. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Mr. Sonterre noted the July Planning Commission discussion focused far more on personal 31 <br />opinions about billboards. He stated there was hardly any discussion about the actual code. He 32 <br />added that the location proposed for the billboard was chosen by the Council and the Planning 33 <br />Commission discussed alternative locations. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Mr. Sonterre explained that the location the property owner determined for the billboard is 36 <br />consistent with code. He added that at the July 5th Planning Commission meeting, no person 37 <br />spoke at the podium regarding depreciation. He said that Director Ericson stated billboards on 38 <br />County Road 10 will impact the residents of Mounds View. He noted that over 30,000 people 39 <br />use the road and Ramsey County treats it as an arterial. He stated that a low percentage of the 40 <br />vehicles passing the billboard will be Mounds View residents. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Acting Mayor Stigney closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. 43 <br /> 44 <br />Acting Mayor Stigney commented that Mr. Kopus currently owns the property, but the CUP is 45