My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-10-2002 Planning Comm. Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
01-10-2002 Planning Comm. Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2008 12:03:29 PM
Creation date
7/23/2008 11:35:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JANUARY 10, 2002 <br />It was pointed out that another bus bench company has recently made an <br />appearance in Little Canada. Ameribench Company had 2 bus benches in <br />the City and recently dropped off an additional 14. It was the appearance <br />of these additional benches that recently triggered the issue from a code <br />enforcement standpoint. <br />Knudsen asked how other cities determine who will get to install benches <br />at bus stop locations. <br />Danielson reported that the City of New Hope, as an example, identifies <br />the locations for the benches, and then utilizes a lottery system to <br />determine which companies get certain locations. <br />Keis asked how effective the advertising is on those benches. Scott <br />Barraclough reported that he will abstain from voting ou this issue as he <br />c~u~rently advertises on two bus benches in the City (one with each <br />company). Barraclough reported that he sees this advertising as effective. <br />Barraclough stated it was his feeling that the benches should be allowed, <br />and that the City come up with a plan for number and location of benches. <br />Barraclough stated that ~he also supported the lottery system. <br />Roycraft stated that even though the benches are privately sponsored, in <br />people's minds they will be City benches and must be maintained <br />prope~iy. Royaaft stated that if the benches are allowed on a private <br />basis, property maintenance will have to be required of the companies. <br />Kevin Moss, Ameribench Company, pointed out that they would provide <br />benches as a service and would expect that the City would collect a fee for <br />each bench. <br />1<eis reported that he takes the bus to work each day. He indicated that he <br />pays no attention to the advertising on the bench, nor does he sit to wait <br />for the bus. I<eis suggested that if this is allowed, the City determine the <br />number of benches allowed as well as location. Keis felt that only City <br />bus benches should be allowed along Little Canada Road and in <br />redevelopment areas. <br />Len Thiel, U.S. Bench Corp., reported that they have operated in the City <br />for 28 years and no one even knew they were here until another company <br />moved benches into the City. Thiel reported that they operate under very <br />strict self-imposed rules and regulations as for the type of advertising they <br />allow as well as maintenance they provide. Thiel reported that they have <br />the City as a named insured under their liability policy. This is something <br />they did on their own without any requirement of the City. <br />I~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.