Minutes - 2006/05/08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council May 8, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 8 on during the last Council meeting. 1 2 MOTION/SECOND: STIGNEY/GUNN. To use the Ordinance document as it was prepared in 3 the Council packet as a base document for discussion. 4 5 Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Thomas) Motion carried. 6 7 MOTION/SECOND: STIGNEY/GUNN. To waive the reading and approve Ordinance 769, an 8 Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008 of the Mounds View Municipal Code Relating to Signs and 9 Billboards. 10 11 Ms. Haake wondered if it is acceptable to not have the same language in the first and second 12 readings of the ordinance. The Council and City Staff stated that the language could change 13 amongst the different readings. 14 15 Ms. Haake confirmed that in the Phase 2 agreement with Medtronic, that if the City made a good 16 faith effort to relocate the billboards, but if locations cannot be found, Medtronic will be due 17 $850,000 per sign and will buyout the Clear Channel billboards. Mayor Marty stated that it 18 would be a determination of the City’s good faith effort. 19 20 Ms. Haake wondered that if the billboards were put on County or State property because of the 21 beautification of Highway 10, if they would all be put at the entrance into Mounds View along 22 Highway 10. She confirmed the sites could be on the south side of new Highway 10 by Arden 23 Park, by the Mounds View Industrial Park, and by Old Highway 8. She asked for confirmation 24 on the idea that the State or County could earn $20,000-$25,000 per year for the placement of 25 signs that would be rented on the right-of-ways. 26 27 Mayor Marty stated that the locations would be wherever Clear Channel could work out a deal. 28 29 Ms. Haake wondered if the County or State would want to earn this revenue and if they did not, it 30 could mean they want beautification of County and State highways, and they did not want 31 billboards. She wondered if the City would also not want billboards for the beautification of 32 County Road 10. 33 34 Director Ericson stated that it would be a policy decision for each entity involved, and the 35 ordinance does not preclude location of billboards on County or State land. He stated the City’s 36 provisions are based on zoning. 37 38 Councilmember Gunn wondered if the City could restrict how many billboards can be located on 39 the area south of Woodale Drive and if it can be limited to one via the spacing. 40 41 City Administrator Ulrich stated the spacing as proposed would not limit it to one billboard with 42 the current code. He stated it could be limited with spacing, but it would then eliminate some 43 other locations. He suggested the area could be restricted from Woodale Drive. 44 45