Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission July 5, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch asked Mr. Sonterre if he approached the R.J. Riches site on 35W. Mr. Sonterre <br />said they looked at a location that was actually closer to the interstate than R.J. Riches and to push it <br />further off the interstate would not be an acceptable site. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch stated this is a business that needs help also. She also asked about the parking <br />lot southeast of R.J. Riches that is controlled by the Metropolitan Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Sonterre said that if R.J. Riches had unobstructed visibility from the interstate and Clear Channel <br />thought they could sell that location on a regular basis it would have been considered. Relative to <br />the parking lot, they did not have a willing participant in that process. Additionally, the bridge that <br />takes eastbound Highway 10 going over 35W was a significant obstruction to the view. They need a <br />minimum of six seconds read time as one approaches a billboard. One of the factors is they have an <br />asset that had a particular value at the golf course that performed at a specific level. The Mermaid is <br />a significant step backwards in the value of the sign to Clear Channel. It is a factor they must <br />consider over all. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch suggested the Planning Commission look at other options for the billboard. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hull asked what year the initial agreement was signed. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson stated the original agreement was with Eller Media in <br />1999 or 2000. He recommends the Planning Commission take action one way or another regarding <br />the IUP and variance request. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stressed they need to take one issue at a time. He asked the Commission to rule on <br />both even if it is denied. If the Council so chooses to overrule the Commission if it is denied, he <br />wants the Council to know whether or not the Commission approves a 45-foot tall billboard, if the <br />Council chooses to site a billboard in this location. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:03 <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Hegland/Commissioner Miller, to recommend approval of <br />resolution 844-06, a resolution denying the resolution for a variance for a 45-foot tall billboard at <br />2200 County Road 10, Planning Case VR 2006-004. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Chair Stevenson) Motion carried. <br /> <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated the second resolution before the Commission is for approval of an Interim <br />Use Permit for a billboard at 2200 County Road 10, Planning Case IU2006-001. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Miller/Commissioner Hull, to recommend approval of <br />resolution 845-06, a resolution denying the request for an Interim Use Permit for a billboard at 2200 <br />County Road 10, Planning Case IU2006-001. <br />