My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Planning Commission - 08/26/2021
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2021
>
Minutes - Planning Commission - 08/26/2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 10:47:46 AM
Creation date
11/4/2021 9:21:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
08/26/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
Commissioner Walker stated that if the sign is going to be leased out, businesses in surrounding <br />communities can advertise in Ramsey versus the actual Ramsey businesses. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff commented that the vendor did provide preferential pricing to <br />Ramsey businesses, it would allow businesses from other communities to advertise as well. He <br />stated that the lease period was proposed at 30 or 35 years and the company committed to <br />maintaining the sign during that period. <br />Chairperson Bauer commented that he did not believe the City could restrict businesses from other <br />communities from advertising on the sign. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff noted that he found the proposed language in the previous vendor <br />proposal which stated that 50 percent of advertising would be reserved for City messages and <br />Ramsey businesses. <br />Commissioner Peters asked if there is language related to election messaging. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff confirmed there are stipulations that would prevent certain content, <br />such as adult and political. He stated that although he agrees with Commissioner Walker, noting <br />that he does not like the City being the only beneficiary, this City land might be the opportunity to <br />test this out. <br />Chairperson Bauer asked if the language related to regulated content would be part of the lease or <br />ordinance language. <br />Councilmember Woestehoff commented that he believed that language was within the lease but <br />noted that the ordinance could also have language related to content. <br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that he is also concerned with the number of signs and is <br />disappointed that this will not result in consolidation. He stated that he does not support this type <br />of sign, but if this moves forward he would like to see a restriction related to the size of the sign. <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that the pending lease would have a sign slightly <br />smaller than 700 square feet. She recommended the discussion focus on location, distance between <br />signs, number of signs, and architectural standards. She noted that the size of the sign has already <br />been set. <br />Commissioner Anderson did not believe enough information has been provided. He stated that he <br />would like information on placement, size, brightness, etc. <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that the discussion from the Commission could be forwarded <br />to the Council, but he would not recommend that this goes forward to ordinance. <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that distance, location, brightness, and size of the sign is <br />included in the draft ordinance. <br />Planning Commission/ August 26, 2021 <br />Page 23 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.