My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03389
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3300
>
pf_03389
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 1:58:08 PM
Creation date
6/9/2005 10:37:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3389
Planning Files - Type
Miscellaneous
Project Name
Bus Shelters
Applicant
Outdoor Promotions
Status
Approved
Date Final City Council Action
7/15/2002
Planning Files - Ordinance #
1276
Agreement Name
Shelter Franchise
Additional Information
Non Exclusive Transit Stop Shelter Francihise
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />Welsch. Dennis <br /> <br />From: <br />S'ent: <br />To: <br />Subject: <br /> <br />Joel J. Jamnik [Joel@ck-Iaw.com] <br />Thursday, January 24, 20024:02 PM <br />'den n is. welsch@ci.roseville.mn.us' <br />RE: Bus shelters <br /> <br />We might have a bigger problem, since then it almost certainly would <br />violate <br />the sign code for "advertising" signs, and then billboards, etc. would <br />all <br />seem to be fair game. I may be overreacting or oversensitive, but it is <br />just that I haven't seen cities win many of the recent sign cases <br />anywhere <br />in the country. <br /> <br />My current thinking is to have the Council approve a policy allowing the <br />placement of shelters in accordance with a plan approved by the Traffic <br />Safety Committee, said plan to identify routes, spacing, and structure <br />design requirements, then modifying sign code to allow x square feet per <br />x <br />square feet of shelter located in full accordance with city plan. But I <br />will admit my stomach is still in knots about this strategy of mine--but <br />I'm <br />not coming up with anything better and the no build strategy means we <br />pay <br />for the shelters.... <br /> <br />-Original Message----- <br />From: dennis.welsch@ci.roseville.mn.us <br />[mailto:dennis.welsch@ci.roseville.mn.us] <br />Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:41 PM <br />To: Joel J. Jamnik <br />Subject: RE: Bus shelters <br /> <br />What if we required them to get an easement from the adjoining property <br />owner and put it on private property? They have done this in some cases. <br />Dennis <br /> <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Joel J. Jamnik [mailto:Joel@ck-law.com] <br />Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:10 PM <br />To: 'dennis. welsch@ci. roseville. mn. us' <br />Subject: RE: Bus shelters <br /> <br />I hate to be a fly in the ointment, but in looking at a very recent <br />court <br />case arising out of the use of Chicago's parks, the US Supreme Court <br />focused <br />extensively on the nondiscriminatory use of city facilities and <br />infrastructure, and strongly hinted that if the City in any way picks <br />and <br />chooses who can and can't use the public facility then the regulation is <br />invalid. While I think we could still justify a distinction between <br />road <br />information signs in the right of way, I am growing increasingly <br />concerned <br />that if we allow any advertising within the right of way we lose all <br />control <br />over any other advertising within our right of way. In other words, if <br />we <br /> <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.