My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2001/11/13
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
Agenda Packets - 2001/11/13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:05 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 11:01:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
11/13/2001
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
11/13/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
114
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
Mounds View City Council October 8, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 12 <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he needs to know that figure before determining if the offer <br />from Clear Channel Outdoor is appropriate. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney asked Clear Channel Outdoor why the conceptual drawings were so far <br />out of scale and noted it makes the billboard look smaller than it really is as this billboard is <br />humongous. He then further commented that he thinks the drawing is a little misleading. <br /> <br />Mr. Cronin indicated that the person that did the drawing was a professional landscape engineer <br />and said his drawing was based on a picture taken with a 50 mm lens on a 35 mm camera and <br />that is considered a normal lens. He then noted that the drawing is in scale from standing on that <br />site. He also noted the picture was taken when driving down the road moving forward and that is <br />how it is in proper context. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarver indicated the drawing does reflect accurately the scale of the billboard. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney held up a drawing and indicated that it was more to scale than the <br />rendering on the easel. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarver indicated that the drawing Council Member Stigney held up is to show exact sign <br />dimensions and is a close up view. He then indicated that the rendering on the easel is not a <br />close up and the drawing on the dais is. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he disagreed with the conceptual drawing being to scale. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he feels he needs to know how much revenue the City was <br />looking at deriving from the golf course billboards before agreeing to an amount. He then <br />indicated that he feels the yearly payments need to consider inflation. <br /> <br />Mr. McCarver restated the offer he had made to Mr. Ericson and noted that his company has a <br />perpetual easement and is not interested in accepting a sunset clause on the agreement with the <br />City. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated he would like the yearly payments to include a CPI. He then <br />commented that the residents own the property around the billboard and could potentially plant <br />pine trees to make it less of an eyesore. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre noted he is a big supporter of Commissions and said he feels the Planning <br />Commission did a great job of reviewing this matter. He further indicated that the billboard will <br />be there forever and it would be in the best interest of the City to have the billboard look better <br />and it is even better that the City can generate revenue from it. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty indicated he was interested in exploring a sunset clause in exchange for <br />the larger billboard and suggested 20 or 30 years. He then indicated that he feels the yearly <br />payments should start at $6,000 per year and slowly climb over time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.