Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission November 3, 1999 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 13 <br /> • Chair Peterson stated they should consider this issue on a land use basis, in terms of whether or not <br /> billboards are appropriate in the PF and CRP land use designations. <br /> Commissioner Stevenson commented about the definition of CRP and PF designated areas, in terms <br /> of preservation and public facilities, billboards do not appear to be appropriate. He stated he could <br /> understand the placement of billboards in commercial districts, however, he was concerned regarding <br /> their placement in areas such as parks and public facilities. <br /> Chair Peterson agreed, adding that he does not believe billboards are compatible with this land use, <br /> and therefore, could not recommend in favor of them. He further indicated he did not believe <br /> billboards were a good use in any land use district, and was of a similar view of the surrounding <br /> communities in that they should not be looking to expand their use, but to restrict it. <br /> Commissioner Laube commented that in light of what they have seen with the city of St. Paul and the <br /> surrounding communities, and their attempts to limit billboards, he had a problem with attempting <br /> to allow them in the City. He added although the measure in St. Paul was voted down, it was by a <br /> very narrow margin. <br /> Commissioner Kaden stated he had a lengthy discussion with an individual who had studied the issue <br /> of billboards in St. Paul. He clarified that new billboards are already banned in St. Paul, and the <br /> recent referendum was to remove approximately 40 to 50 percent of the existing billboards within the <br /> next 5 to 15 years. He explained this referendum would have actively removed billboards in good <br /> condition. He pointed out that the current law in St. Paul, which bans new billboards, indicates if a <br /> billboard is taken down as a result of redevelopment, or destroyed by a storm, it may not be <br /> reconstructed. <br /> Commissioner Laube stated this referendum came very close to removing a percentage of billboards, <br /> in addition to the current sunset law. He explained this represents that citizens do not desire the <br /> billboards that currently exist. He added that he does not desire to see billboards at the golf course. <br /> Chair Peterson requested the Commissioners provide their leanings on this issue, as a directive for <br /> staff. <br /> Commissioner Berke stated he was opposed to billboards in any type of a park or golf course. He <br /> explained they have attempted to create a nice facility with the golf course, and placing billboards in <br /> the middle of it to generate some revenue, in his opinion, would be throwing bad after good, and <br /> destroying a nice recreational area. <br /> Commissioner Kaden stated he agreed that placing billboards in PF or CRP areas was not a good <br /> idea. He explained these areas were intended to present a nice appearance, and billboards would not <br /> further or enhance that purpose. He explained although the economic considerations were not within <br /> the purview of the Planning Commission, he had asked several of his neighbors and other residents <br /> if they would be in favor of billboards on City owned property to help with the City budget, and <br /> • possibly prevent raising taxes in the future. He stated that each individual emphatically stated they <br />