03-01-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission March 1, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 3 of similar materials, and maintain a consistent design theme, as presented on Page 6 of the Eller Media proposal. He advised that another stipulation addresses the issue of whether or not the billboards can be permitted through the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and indicates that if a billboard permit cannot be obtained from MnDOT, the Interim Use Permit approved by the City will be considered null and void. Planning Associate Ericson stated the signs do not appear to present adverse effects, with regard to the subject property. He indicated the Planning Commission discussed this issue at great lengths at their last meeting, and the general Conditional Use Permit requirements appear to be met by this proposal, as well as the adverse effects criteria. He stated the Planning Commission received testimony from a resident who lives on the south side of Highway 10, who was concerned regarding the location of the signs, and the potential effect they would have on her property. He indicated staff is of the opinion that the installation of the signs would not be detrimental to the property values of those properties located on the south side of Highway 10. Superintendent Hammerschmidt provided the Commission with a site map, which showed the proposed locations of the signs. He indicated the first sign would be situated in the corner of the golf course property at its easternmost point, in the area where the second green adjoins 35W on the boundary of Mounds View and the City of Blaine. He provided the Commission with an overview of the site locations from the eastern to the northwestern edges of the property, and explained that a minimum of 1,000 feet is required between each sign. Superintendent Hammerschmidt stated there would be a 1,400-foot separation between the first and second signs. The second sign has been extended forward so that it will not interfere with the western sight lines from the onramp, and would otherwise only be visible to eastbound traffic. He stated the third sign would be located 1,000 feet from the second, and situated on the edge of the swamp, in the middle of the golf course. Superintendent Hammerschmidt indicated the fourth sign would be located 1,000 feet from the sixth green, and the fifth sign would be another 1,000 feet, and adjusted slightly toward the east because it could not be located directly in front of the eighth green. He explained that they placed this location approximately 40 to 50 feet behind the eighth green, to the east of Judicial Ditch. He indicated that from this point, they moved exactly 1,000 feet to the sixth sign location, which would be at the edge of the woods clearing, and approximately 375 to 400 feet east of the golf course property line, which is adjacent to the Sysco property. He indicated this is the maximum amount of separation they can provide, and they could not move any farther to the east of the property line. Superintendent Hammerschmidt advised that Sysco’s preferred site is in very close proximity to the property line, which would allow them to construct the sign off of their parking lot, however, the distance between this location and the City sign would be less than 1,000 feet. He advised that in the northwest corner of the Sysco property, there is a portion of land that extends down from the junction of County Road J and Highway 10, however, this would not be an acceptable