Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council February 14, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 14 <br />• Commission's final say on the matter. He advised that it would be more appropriate to have the <br />Planning Commission examine the matter, prior to this action. <br />Golf Course Director Hammerschmidt stated the Planning Commission would review the matter <br />on Wednesday, and the lease agreement would be negotiated within the next two weeks. He <br />explained that staff was not attempting to rush this matter through, but rather, to maintain a good <br />timetable. He advised that the sunset provision is already built into the lease, and each day they <br />do not have the billboards represents approximately $800 to $1,000 per day lost revenue, <br />therefore, there is some impetus to construct the signs as quickly as possible, since they have <br />decided to proceed with this proposal. <br />Council Member Stigney inquired if he was correct, therefore, in his understanding that staff was <br />simply gathering preliminary lease agreements, prior to the Planning Commission review, and <br />prior to the matter coming back before the Council. <br />Golf Course Director Hammerschmidt stated in his understanding, the actual lease agreement <br />would not go before the Planning Commission for consideration. <br />City Administrator Whiting advised that there were two matters occurring in tandem with each <br />other. He explained that the Interim Use Permit must be put together, and in order to do this, the <br />City would have to have something from Eller Media suggesting what the nature of the signs <br />would be, and whether or not this is what the City desires. He indicated that when making the <br />final decisions on both of these matters, he was uncertain which should come first. <br />• <br />City Attorney Long stated the City would have to obtain an Interim Use Permit to place <br />billboards on City property, regardless of which vendor is selected, and therefore, they must <br />make application under Ordinance 644, which gives the authority to have billboards as an <br />interim use. He advised that if a lease is negotiated or entered into, it would have as a condition <br />that it would only be valid if the vendor were able to obtain the necessary State permit. He <br />explained that this second permit is required in order to place billboards on, or adjacent to a State <br />highway. <br />City Attorney Long explained that there were four steps in this process. He indicated the first <br />step is he consideration currently before the Council, which is to authorize working with a <br />vendor. The second step would be to negotiate a lease, which contains the condition pertaining <br />to a State permit. The third step would be for the City, as the owner of the property, to obtain the <br />Interim Use Permit, and the fourth step would be for the vendor to actually obtain the State <br />Highway permit. He advised that the Planning Commission is technically not the applicant for <br />any of these items, but rather, their involvement would be in terms of reviewing the Interim Use <br />Permit. <br />Council Member Stigney inquired at what point in this process would the public hearing for <br />residents' concerns be held. <br />. City Attorney Long stated the public hearing would probably occur upon the granting of the <br />Interim Use Permit. He explained that the Planning Commission would notice their review of <br />the permit as a public hearing, after which, the matter come back before the Council, in order to <br />grant the permit. <br />