My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-21-1999
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
07-21-1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2024 9:17:20 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 10:34:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
7/21/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />July 7, 1999 <br />Page 23 <br />9. Special Planning Case No. SP-071-99 <br />Consideration of a proposed ordinances amending Chapter 1008 of the <br />Code pertaining to Billboards and amending the Code pertaining to signag <br />districts. <br />Community Development Director Jopke stated that thp, <br />Planning Commission continue to look into and make redq, <br />the sign ordinance. He stated that these amendment were <br />of the community, and to allow signs in the PF (P <br />Recreational and Preservation) zoning districts. <br />Jopke stated that he had drafted two ordinances to <br />matters. He stated that the first ordinance de; <br />discussions with a representative from thiliboard�. {` <br />ordinances from the Cities of Minneapoll'_ `and St. ,ul. Hj #hat he had discussed the issues <br />with Mike Cronin, a consultant r..::tsenting }<t'e billboZ1 industry, and had considered his <br />suggestions when drafting the or d i e. Hero` vided **Commission *Commission with ' copy of the draft <br />ordinance, and reviewed its com <br />ounds ew Municipal <br />4 <br />and CRP zoning <br />N7 <br />ty Coucil had requ a the <br />cations concernin <drnents to <br />united billboards in certain areas <br />and CRP (Conservancy, <br />Jopke stat.. x R . t the ord na <br />one spa ::::;; <;`1 e ease <br />if granted, c1e when <br />state permits tve €1 obtained <br />nning C ion discussion of these <br />his_t rdinance was drafted after <br />n. <br />er reviewing state rules and <br />empts to%p" `all of the billboard standards and regulation in <br />;ration. ated that the Conditional Use Permit for billboards, <br />54, <br />gig! lease expired, and would be null and void if any required <br />Jopke stated l tl ,quire Tents, pursuant to Council direction, were defined as the City <br />along>'of Highway 118. He stated that billboards should be oriented to <br />ys 118 or 35W jIItieast 250 feet from residentially zoned property. He adde tat <br />rds could be locat with zero setback from streets, but may not overhang the right-of-way. <br />stated that one a suggestions for the spacing of billboards was 1500 feet measured along <br />e same r,: ay. He stated that he had discussed the matter with John Hammerschmidt who <br />1000-foot separation would be preferable to maximize the number of potential <br />bil He stated that the maximum area of signs should be 700 square feet, but that <br />temporary extensions would be allowed, as long as they don't exceed 25 percent of the sign area or <br />certain dimensions. He stated that these requirements are based on standard billboard sizes and <br />practice, and consistent with requirements in other communities. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.