Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. CURT MILLER OIL COMPANY, INC., 76-000161 (1976)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 76-000161 Visitors: 15
Judges: DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND
Agency: Department of Transportation
Latest Update: Oct. 11, 1976
Summary: Whether the Respondent is in violation of Sections 479.07(1)(4)(6) and 479.11(1), Florida Statutes. Whether subject signs violate state and federal laws and should be removed.Respondent's sign violates set-back, zoning requirements and permitting requirements. Recommend removal of sign.
76-0161

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 76-161T

) CURT MILLER OIL COMPANY, INC., )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


After due notice a public hearing was held before Delphene C. Strickland, Hearing Officer, Department of Administration, Division of Administrative Hearings, on March 2, 1976 in the Conference Room of the Department of Transportation, Chipley, Florida at 9:00 a.m.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Philip S. Bennett, Esquire

Office of Legal Operations Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304


For Respondent: Harvey J. Belser, Esquire

608 North Waukesha Street Bonifay, Florida


ISSUE


Whether the Respondent is in violation of Sections 479.07(1)(4)(6) and 479.11(1), Florida Statutes.


Whether subject signs violate state and federal laws and should be removed.


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. The following described sign is located in an unzoned area and violates the set back requirements being closer than 660 feet from the nearest edge of the road right-of-way:


    Highway: I-10

    Location: 6/10 of a mile west of State Road 81 south side of I-10

    Copy: Fina Gas-Diesel-Exit 1/2 Mile then Left


  2. Notice of violation regarding subject sign was properly sent by the Department of Transportation and received by the Respondent.

  3. No application was made prior the the erection of the subject sign, and the sign has been refused a permit.


  4. Mr. Curtis A. Miller, Jr., the President and major stockholder of Curt Miller Oil Company, Inc. in good faith discussed the erection of the subject sign with the councilmen and Mayor of Ponce de Leon, Florida, and proceeded to erect his sign without first obtaining a permit from the Department of Transportation.


  5. The Respondent contends that the sign is needed, that he spent a large amount of money on the erection and that he thought the sign would be in a properly zoned area at the time the erection was completed. Respondent admits that the sign at the time of the hearing is in violation of the set back requirements of Chapter 479, Florida Statutes. The Petitioner contends that it refused to permit the sign inasmuch as the set back was less than 660 feet from the nearest edge of the right-of-way of an interstate highway.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  6. Chapter 479, Florida Statutes, requires that signs may not be erected within 660 feet of the federal aid roads unless an application is made, a permit is issued, and after erection of the sign a tag is placed thereon. The permit will not be issued if the proposed sign violates the set back requirement of the area in which the sign is erected. Subject sign was erected without a permit and it is not now eligible for a permit in the present location with present zoning.


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Remove subject sign within ten (10) days from date of Final Order unless Respondent previously removes said sign.


DONE and ORDERED this 23rd day of April, 1976.


DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675


COPIES FURNISHED:


Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Harvey J. Belser, Esquire

Office of Legal Operations 608 North Waukesha Street

Department of Transportation Bonifay, Florida Haydon Burns Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32304


Docket for Case No: 76-000161
Issue Date Proceedings
Oct. 11, 1976 Final Order filed.
Apr. 23, 1976 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 76-000161
Issue Date Document Summary
Oct. 07, 1976 Agency Final Order
Apr. 23, 1976 Recommended Order Respondent's sign violates set-back, zoning requirements and permitting requirements. Recommend removal of sign.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer