Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. NORTH LAKE FOODS (FACING NORTH), 85-001775 (1985)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 85-001775 Visitors: 5
Judges: K. N. AYERS
Agency: Department of Transportation
Latest Update: Jun. 03, 1986
Summary: Sign on property adjacent to business is not an on premise sign.
85-1775.PDF


STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT ) OF TRANSPORTATION, )

)

Petitioner, ) CASE NO. 85-1775T

) (facing South)

vs. )

) CASE NO. 85-1776T

NORTH LAKE FOODS, ) (facing North)

)

Respondent. )

) STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT ) OF TRANSPORTATION, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 85-3481T

)

ROBERT MCQUEEN, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Pursuant to notice the Division of Administrative Hearings by duly designated Hearing Officer, K. N. Ayers, held a consolidated hearing in the above styled cases on April 24, 1986, at Bartow, Florida.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Charles G. Gardner, Esquire

DOT - Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301


For Respondent: W. Kevin Russell, Esquire

201 West Marion Avenue, Suite 101 Punta Gorda, Florida 33950

By Notices of Alleged Violation dated May 8, 1985, and July 1, 1985, North Lake Foods and Robert McQueen were charged with violations of Chapter 479 Florida Statutes, by reason of an outdoor advertising sign located on the I-75 near Punta Gorda, Florida. Specifically, the sign was alleged to violate s. 479.07(1) Florida Statutes, in not having a permit, s 479.05(5) Florida Statutes, by failing to display a permit and s. 479.02(1) Florida Statutes, for being within 500 feet of a restricted interchange.


At the hearing Petitioner called four witnesses, Respondents called two witnesses and thirteen exhibits were admitted into evidence. There is no dispute regarding the facts here involved. Proposed findings submitted by the parties and not included herein were deemed unnecessary to the conclusions reached.


The sole issue in this case is whether the sign here involved is an "on-premise" sign and exempt from regulation by Petitioner.


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Robert McQueen, Respondent in Case 85-3481T owns in fee simple land known as the McQueen Commercial Park adjacent to the intersection of Jones Loop Road and I-75 in Charlotte County, Florida. I-75 is part of the Federal Highway System.


  2. North Lake Foods, Respondent in Cases 85-1775T and 85-1776T, is the lessee of certain lands located within said commercial park where the sign is located.


  3. The McQueen Commercial Park consists of approximately twenty acres of contiguous land, zoned commercial intensive, presently under development. The project is not complete, but roads, water, sewage, and drainage have been installed.


  4. Respondent received a sign permit from Charlotte County for the construction of a Class A sign (on-premise sign).


  5. The sign carries only the name of the establishment it advertises, viz, "Waffle House", and its cost to construct was approximately $30,000.00.

  6. The base structure of this sign is owned by McQueen and the face of the sign is owned by North Lake Foods. The building housing the restaurant is also owned by McQueen.


  7. Although McQueen receives no direct rental income from this sign, under the terms of the lease which authorizes the tenant to erect signs complying with all laws, McQueen receives a percentage of the sales from the restaurant.


  8. This sign is within 660 feet of I-75 and is visible from that interstate. In fact the sole purpose of the sign is to alert the traveling public on I-75 of the presence of a Waffle House Restaurant at that location.


  9. The sign is located outside of any incorporated city limits and is within the interchange of I-75 and Jones Loop Road as defined in Rule 14-10.06(1)(b)1b., Florida Administrative Code.


  10. The sign is separated from the restaurant by a public access road and is located in a large fenced area used as a pasture. McQueen testified the area in which the sign is located was retained as a grazing area so as to comply with the Florida Greenbelt Law and have the property taxed at the agriculture rate. No activity associated with the restaurant is conducted on the parcel of land on which this sign is located.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  11. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to, and the subject matter of, these proceedings.


  12. Section 479.16, Florida Statutes, provides that signs erected on the premises of an establishment, which sign consists primarily of the name of the establishment, is exempt from the requirement that advertising signs have a permit issued.


  13. Section 479.01(13), Florida Statutes, provides:


    "Premises" means an area of land occupied by the buildings or other physical uses which are an integral part of the activity conducted

    upon the land and such open spaces as are arranged and designed to be used in conjunction with that activity.


  14. This sign is located within the interchange as defined in Rule 14-10.06(1)(b)1b. which provides:


    Outside incorporated towns and cities, no structure may be located adjacent to or within five hundred (500) feet of an interchange, intersection at grade, or safety rest area.

    Said five hundred (500) feet to be measured along the Interstate from the beginning or ending of pavement widening at the exit from or entrance to the main-traveled way.


  15. Since the sign is located within the interchange no permit for this sign may be issued and, unless the sign is exempt from regulation as being an on-premise sign, it is illegal.


  16. As noted in the ultimate finding of fact above this sign is not located in the immediate vicinity of the building where the Waffle House Restaurant plies its trade or on land on which any function of this restaurant is carried out. Accordingly it does not fit the description of an on-premise sign and is not exempt under the provisions of s. 479.16 Florida Statutes.


  17. From the foregoing it is concluded that the Waffle House sign located within a fenced grazing area at the intersection of Jones Loop Road and I-75 in Charlotte County is not an on-premise sign and is not exempt from regulation. Since this sign is also located within the interchange it cannot be permitted. It is


RECOMMENDED that Respondent be directed to remove the Waffle House sign from its present location near the intersection of Jones Loop Road and I-75 in Charlotte County.


ENTERED this 3rd day of June, 1986.



K. N. AYERS Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 3rd day of June, 1986.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Thomas E. Drawdy, Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Bldg., M.S. 58 Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8064


Charles G. Gardner, Esquire

A. J. Spalla, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Bldg., M.S. 58

Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8064


W. Kevin Russell, Esquire

201 West Marion Avenue Suite 701

Punta Gorda, Florida 33950


Docket for Case No: 85-001775
Issue Date Proceedings
Jun. 03, 1986 Recommended Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 85-001775
Issue Date Document Summary
Sep. 02, 1986 Agency Final Order
Jun. 03, 1986 Recommended Order Sign on property adjacent to business is not an on premise 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