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 6 <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson inquired regarding the area required to construct a monople sign versus a <br />monument style sign, in terms of the amount of space Sysco would lose in their parking lot if <br />they were to construct a monument style sign. <br /> <br />Superintendent Hammerschmidt indicated the monument style sign would be 51 feet in length, <br />and there would be a separation of 15 to 30 feet, depending upon the sight angle. He explained <br />that the signs would be 50 feet by 50 feet, and with the addition of safety poles, would involve at <br />least several hundred square feet. He pointed out that they were proposing the monument style <br />signs at the golf course because of the design issues that had come forward in the initial <br />discussion pertaining to the monopole structures. He stated he would not attempt to tell Sysco <br />how to proceed, however, if his spacing calculations at the golf course are correct, Sysco would <br />not have a need to install a sign in their parking lot, and could install the monument style signs at <br />the locations he has suggested. He explained that there would be sufficient room for this, and it <br />would be nice to have similar signs. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson inquired regarding the distance between the sixth sign proposed on the <br />golf course, and the location of the first sign on the Sysco property. Superintendent <br />Hammerschmidt stated approximately 550 to 600 feet. <br /> <br />Mr. Coyle pointed out that this would satisfy the MnDOT spacing requirement. <br /> <br />Superintendent Hammerschmidt advised that even if the spacing requirement were changed to <br />800 feet, there would not be sufficient room to install any more signs at the golf course because <br />of the physical barriers. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller inquired if the City would consider five signs at the golf course, instead of <br />six. Superintendent Hammerschmidt stated the Council had originally proposed six because of <br />the distance between the signs and the economic factors. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland inquired regarding the amount of frontage Sysco has on Highway 10. <br /> <br />Superintendent Hammerschmidt indicated Sysco has 1,200 feet of frontage, however, the plans <br />indicate 1,649 feet, because the measurements were taken all the way to the edge of County <br />Road J. He explained that the Sysco property begins on Highway 10, and extends into the right- <br />of-way on County Road J, therefore, they have 1,400 feet, with a 200-foot easement in the center <br />of it, which totals approximately 1600 feet of frontage. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stevenson inquired regarding the likelihood of obtaining the permits from <br />MnDOT for the six signs proposed by the City, and then obtaining permits for two additional <br />signs shortly thereafter. <br /> <br />Mr. Coyle advised that as long as the City has approved a permit, and the spacing requirements <br />and other Code requirements provided for under the State Statutes are met, MnDOT is obligated
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.