My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-16-2000
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
02-16-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2018 8:27:42 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 8:27:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Minutes
GOVBOARD
Planning Commission
DOCTYPE
minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 February 16, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 26 <br /> <br /> <br />construction, and the third item is that the lease agreement contain language that the property <br />owner reserves the right to refuse objectionable content. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kaden inquired if the Commission would like to include a comment regarding the <br />resident’s concern pertaining to depreciated property values. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this issue was very vague, and he was uncertain what the <br />Council could do to address this. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson commented that if he were in this situation, he would be far more <br />concerned with regard to traffic noise. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller stated this resident was aware of approximate locations of the billboards, <br />however, she was not certain this resident could be so specific at this time, as to state the <br />billboard would be visible from her window. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson pointed out that six billboards would certainly not be visible, but <br />rather one, and perhaps two, depending upon the location of her property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kaden commented that this resident might have had second thoughts, after seeing <br />the proposed billboards, as opposed to a typical monopole sign she may have been anticipating. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated this was correct, adding that from the perspective of her <br />property, a brick pole may be visible, with no type of signage in view. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kaden stated he did not find the proposed billboards to be objectionable <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated staff would present the Planning Commission’s <br />recommendations and sentiments to the Council at their meeting on February 28, and would <br />bring this item back before the Planning Commission at their meeting on March 1, 2000. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson thanked the audience members for their attendance and input. <br /> <br />8. Staff Reports / Items of Information <br /> <br />A. Previous Council Actions <br /> <br />Community Development Director Jopke stated at the February 14, City Council Meeting, the <br />Council approved second reading and adoption of Ordinance 637, which was the ordinance <br />creating the sign standards for the Public Facilities and Conservancy, Recreational, and <br />Preservation Zoning Districts. He indicated a paragraph relating to Planned Unit Development <br />Districts was added to the ordinance, because the Sysco property is zoned Planned Unit <br />Development.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.