Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(651 )290-6907 <br />ifilla@ofb-oa.com <br /> <br />September 5, 2007 <br /> <br />James Lehnhoff <br />City Planner <br />City of Arden Hills <br />1245 West Hwy 96 <br />Arden Hills, MN 55112 <br /> <br />VIA EMAIL <br /> <br />RE: Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. <br />Electronic Billboard <br /> <br />James: <br /> <br />One of the issues raised in connection with the City's review of the Clear <br />Channel, Inc.'s electronic billboard permit application is whether the <br />alterations which was made to the electronic billboard was in the nature of a <br />repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance or improvement to a <br />nonconforming sign which is allowed by M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1e (a), or whether <br />the alteration was an expansion of a nonconforming use which is not allowed <br />without some type of City approval. In this particular case the City could allow <br />an expansion by means of an Agreement between the City and Clear Channel <br />Inc. which would incorporate the sign area on another Clear Channel Inc. ( <br />Arden Hills City Code 1320.13, Subd. 6 (G)(3). <br /> <br />I have advised the City that it can be argued that the alterations to the Clear <br />Channel, Inc.'s electronic billboard amounted to an expansion of a <br />nonconforming use. In Adams Outdoor Advertisinq LP. et. al. v. Board of <br />Zoninq Aooeals of the Citv of Virqinia Beach, 2007 WL 1651100 (Va.) decided <br />on June 8, 2007, the Virginia Supreme Court was asked to determine whether <br />the alterations of an electric billboard resulted in an enlargement of a <br />nonconforming use. The billboard height, length and advertising surface did <br />not change but the following alterations were made to the electric billboard: <br /> <br />1. Holes were cut into the frame of the billboard. <br />2. Bracing was added. <br />3. The weight was increased by 3,500 lbs. <br />4. The mass of the billboard was increased. <br /> <br />