My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-01-2000
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
03-01-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2018 8:28:00 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 8:27:50 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.
/
23
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 March 1, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 18 <br /> <br /> <br />properties would be negatively impacted, and after their previous discussion, the Planning <br />Commission determined that there did not appear to be a significant affect to these properties. <br /> <br />Ms. Olsen stated the Planning Commission had requested both parties come to an agreement in <br />regard to the two applications. She requested clarification regarding what had occurred in this <br />regard. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson explained that the applicants have attempted to discuss the issues, <br />however, one of the applicants was unavailable, and there has been no complete agreement as to <br />the placement of the signs at this time. <br /> <br />Ms. Olsen inquired if the item could be tabled in light of this. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson explained that the Planning Commission was considering language to <br />address this issue in their recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Miller advised <br />that they have added language to the resolution that both applicants continue to work together. <br /> <br />Ms. Olsen indicated that until they are certain that an agreement has been reached, she would <br />like to see that the item is tabled. She stated this item could go before the Council as a <br />recommendation, however, there was no assurance that it would occur. Commissioner Berke <br />advised that the item would come before the Planning Commission prior to final approval. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated both applicants have stood before the Planning Commission <br />and have indicated they feel very strongly that this will be resolved. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson stated further delay at the Planning Commission level would not <br />necessarily be beneficial, and it was best to move forward with the item. He explained that both <br />applicants have indicated their willingness to work together towards a resolution, and he has <br />every confidence they would do so. He stated there was a motion on the floor to approve <br />Resolution 606-00, with several amendments and corrections. He inquired if there was any <br />further discussion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller requested clarification regarding the language proposed for Stipulation 5. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated the proposed language indicates βThe City shall work in <br />conjunction with DeLite Outdoor Advertising to maximize the proposed signage regarding both <br />Interim Use Permit applications. Such agreement shall be determined prior to Council action on <br />this request.β <br /> <br /> Ayes β 8 Nays β 0 The motion carried. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.