Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Icons And Aliens: Law, Aesthetics, And Environmental Change, Scott Schrader
Icons And Aliens: Law, Aesthetics, And Environmental Change, Scott Schrader
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Icons and Aliens: Law, Aesthetics, and Environmental Change by John J. Costonis
Beyond The Eye Of The Beholder: Aesthetics And Objectivity, Michigan Law Review
Beyond The Eye Of The Beholder: Aesthetics And Objectivity, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The term "aesthetic legislation," as used in this Note, refers only to legislation that bears upon the visual character of the physical environment, rather than to legislation on problems of noise and odor. The legal system has handled problems of the latter sort much better; only the sense of sight has been left unprotected. Perhaps one reason for its neglect is that in order to make an area visually pleasing positive programs, such as zoning, must be used, as well as passive prohibitions of such noxious uses as billboards. Noise and odor problems, which can be resolved by prohibitions alone, …
Billboard Control Under The Highway Beautification Act Of 1965, Roger A. Cunningham
Billboard Control Under The Highway Beautification Act Of 1965, Roger A. Cunningham
Michigan Law Review
Although the advertising control provisions of the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 have been the subject of unremitting controversy from the date of enactment until the present time, only three substantive amendments to title I have been adopted in the intervening years. These are the amendments to subsections ( d) and (j) and the addition of a new subsection (n) all of which were adopted in 1968.
Municipal Corporations-Billboards-Prohibition Near Parks And Boulevards
Municipal Corporations-Billboards-Prohibition Near Parks And Boulevards
Michigan Law Review
The defendant acting under statutory authority passed an ordinance prohibiting billboards within five hundred feet of any park or boulevard. Held, the ordinance was valid but unenforceable as to existing billboards except upon the payment of compensation. General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. City of Indianapolis (Ind. 1930) 172 N.E. 309.