Agenda Packets - 2006/08/28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council July 24, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 9 1 Director Ericson explained that the Council needs to consider the criteria guiding an IUP, such as 2 adverse effects, impact on adjoining properties, and issues associated with appearance, such as 3 degradation or impact on the County Road 10 corridor. 4 5 Director Ericson stated Staff has concluded there is justification for denial. He stated based on 6 Planning Commission’s recommendation, there are recommendations denying the IUP and 7 variance. He stated that it is a subjective decision by the Council and there is a resolution that 8 approves both the IUP and variance. He stated there is also a resolution approving the IUP and 9 denying the variance. 10 11 Director Ericson stated there has been additional public feedback including a resident who 12 commented on the application. He stated there is a letter from Mr. Kopas, adjoining the property 13 owner, who does not oppose the billboard as long as it is at a height of 45 feet. He stated that 14 one member of the Planning Commission determined that if the IUP is approved, the variance 15 should be approved because there is an issue with visibility and obstruction. 16 17 Mayor Marty opened the public hearing at 8:06 p.m. 18 19 Mr. Glidden pointed out that at every meeting he has attended so far, all of the input about the 20 billboard has been negative. He stated he understands that there has been input in writing from 21 three residents requesting denial. He noted that he expressed his opposition at the last meeting 22 and that citizens are asking that the Council deny the IUP. 23 24 Mr. Glidden pointed out that the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the IUP and voted 4-1 25 opposing the variance. He stated the only reason for the 1 approving vote, was because if the 26 permit was approved, the height does matter. He stated that the one other business owner who 27 spoke was Mr. Kopas and he was initially in opposition to the billboard and is now only in favor 28 of it at 45 feet. 29 30 Dan Hall, 2200 County Road 10, pointed out that there was a town hall meeting and not one 31 person who was there brought up the issue of billboards. He stated it is clear that the citizens do 32 not have a problem with the billboard since there are not many residents speaking up in 33 opposition. 34 35 Mr. Hall addressed the impact on the County Road 10 corridor. He stated the Corridor has many 36 problems and that the half-full strip malls are much more negative than a billboard. He stated 37 there is high traffic at the proposed site and that is where a billboard belongs. He stated that he 38 believes that it is a problem when government interferes with private enterprise. 39 40 Mr. Hall pointed out the drug stores and their negative impact. He stated the empty buildings are 41 a larger problem. He noted that Councilmember Stigney stated there would be depreciation for 42 Mr. Kopas’ building but such an opinion is in opposition to Councilmember Stigney’s statement 43 that he would like to stay out of business. 44 45