My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-05-2007
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
07-05-2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2018 10:16:13 AM
Creation date
8/30/2018 10:09:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
7/5/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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 Planning Commission June 21, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 17 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch said the Planning Commission is looking for another option so there is full <br />view of the signs of other businesses. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated that when he indicated the requirements of the Interim Use Permit <br />application have been satisfied, there is some slight subjectivity with this as well. He indicated <br />that the use would not depreciate the area in which it was proposed and has received feedback <br />from adjacent property owners expressing some concern with the location. When looking at an <br />interim use permit and if the Commission feels the location does pose a depreciatory effect or <br />hardship for adjoining property owners, the Commission can make that statement and make a <br />recommendation to the City Council based on that. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland would like to see Clear Channel make an effort to talk to Abbey Carpet <br />and work this out. Mr. Sonterre stated he is happy to speak with him. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson gave Director Ericson the recommendation to City Council that this is not a <br />good location for the sign. It is not in consideration of the property owners of Mounds View. <br />Whether it is 35 feet or 55 feet it is not a good location for the sign. <br /> <br />Mr. Charlie Hall, owner of Mermaid, addressed the Commission. He has owned the Mermaid for <br />33 years. He stated they have grown, and all of his money, wife’s money is in this business. His <br />son is also very involved in the business. There is a hardship for him. They are happy to have <br />the money from the sign because they need it. The sign is crucial to them. Mr. Hall listed things <br />that have happen to him from a business perspective that has added to their hardship. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stopped the discussion and directed Clear Channel to find out if a new location <br />on the Mermaid property is possible. If the best decision is the location currently recommended, <br />what is the minimum height to eliminate interference with other businesses. Chair Stevenson <br />would like this by the next Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson directed staff to determine the correct location and height for the billboard. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland requests to see if there is any way to redesign the support structure so it <br />is no larger than it has to be. Mr. Sonterre explained that each structure is designed to meet the <br />requirements of the customer. He said they strive to make billboards the least intrusive as <br />possible. This particular design was approved by the City Council. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. <br /> <br />No motion. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Other Planning Activity <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.