03-15-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission March 15, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 5 course. He indicated Sysco has sent the City a letter, informing it that ground signs were not feasible on their property, as they would create a safety hazard for the truck traffic. He explained that they propose to utilize a brick wrap-around of the pole to provide a complementary style, and would be willing to work with City staff to attempt to obtain an appropriate design. He pointed out that this represents an additional cost to them, however, they understand the sentiments of the Planning Commission. Mr. Coyle stated the primary issue is the variance, in that they do not believe it should be their burden to satisfy this requirement, and particularly so, given that the staff recommendation acknowledges the potential that the interim use permit might not be granted by the City Council. He explained that if this were the case, Sysco would be left with only one billboard on its property, however, the City would have all six it has proposed, which they do not believe would be the proper outcome. He stated they would argue that the City should be prepared to give up one sign location if necessary, in order to achieve the spacing requirements of the private property taxpayer. He indicated they had no problem with the other recommendations set forth in the staff report. Commissioner Miller inquired regarding the exact distance between Sysco’s two billboards. Mr. Coyle stated their billboards were 1,000 feet apart, which meets the spacing requirement of the City Code. He pointed out that the southernmost Sysco billboard and the northernmost City billboard create the conflict. Chairperson Peterson indicated this was a public hearing, and opened the floor for public comment. There was no public input. Commissioner Johnson inquired if the first sign on the golf course was located as far to the east as possible. Planning Associate Ericson stated this was correct. He explained that this sign maintains a 1,000-foot separation from the second sign, which was situated as far over as possible without being located in a green. Commissioner Miller inquired how it was determined that Sysco request a variance, rather than the City. Planning Associate Ericson stated the City Attorney has indicated that this was the more appropriate manner in which to proceed. He pointed out that while there were two sides to this issue, and a case could be made that either party could bear the burden of obtaining the variance, the majority of staff and the City Attorney were uncomfortable with the concept of the City granting itself a variance, in terms of how this might be perceived by the general public. Staff has recommended that Sysco apply for the variance. He pointed out, however, the resolution could be changed if the Planning Commission so desires. Commissioner Stevenson inquired if there was a point on the Sysco property where their second sign could be located that would not impede truck traffic. Mr. Coyle stated in his understanding,