Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. DON'S SIGNS, 88-000885 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-000885 Latest Update: May 12, 1988

Findings Of Fact On or about January 11, a DOT sign inspector observed two signs owned by Respondent on what appeared to be the right-of-way of U.S. 19 in the vicinity of C.R. 576 in Pinellas County. The right-of-way of U.S. 19 at this location extends 100 feet east and west of the centerline of U.S. 19 and 50 feet east and west of the edge she paved surface of U.S. 19. U.S. 19 is a Federal Aid Primary Highway and part of the State Highway System Measurements were taken on the distance from the edge of the paved surface of U.S. 19 to the signs. The sign located 500 feet south of C.R. 576 was 35 feet from the edge of the pavement, and the sign 0.1 mile south of C.R. 576 was 38 feet from the edge of the pavement. On or about January 27, 1988, the DOT sign inspector observed a sign 0.75 mile south of C.R. 592 owned by Respondent on what appeared to be the right-of-way of U.S. 19 in Pinellas County. The right-of-way of U.S. 19 in this location is the same as in Finding No. 2 above. Measurements taken of this sign from the edge of the pavement showed the sign to be 38 feet from the edge of the paved surface of U.S. 19, placing the sign some 12 feet inside the right-of-way boundary. Respondent submitted photographs of other signs which appeared to be on the right-of-way of U.S. 19 in the vicinity of Respondent's signs which were not cited for being on the right-of-way. However, during the past year some 2,000 violations have been issued citing signs, principally along U.S. 19, with being located on the right-of-way.

Florida Laws (2) 479.107479.11
# 1
PATRICK MEDIA GROUP, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 91-003807 (1991)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tampa, Florida Jun. 20, 1991 Number: 91-003807 Latest Update: Apr. 20, 1992

Findings Of Fact The property on which the structure was located was acquired by the Department of Transportation (DOT) for roadway purposes. The project was part of a federal program for road improvement. The structure in controversy is an outdoor advertising sign owned by Patrick Media. Relocation benefits were offered by the DOT pursuant to the Federal Uniform Relocation Act. This sign was a legal nonconforming sign at the time of taking. Patrick Media had a leasehold interest in the site on which the sign was located. Patrick Media has removed the structure. The structure in question was comprised of two facings (V-shaped configuration), lights, service ladders and catwalks. It was built in 1978 and has been in continuous service since that time. The site is leased on a year to year renewable basis with either party able to terminate the lease at the expiration of the lease year. Contracts with advertisers involve multiple locations with price depending upon the number of motorists passing the sign per unit of time. Revenue received from face A (facing west) from August 15, 1990 to May 5, 1991 was $3739 (net) and from face B (east facing) from May 25, 1990 to May 25, 1991 was $2288 (net). As a nonconforming sign, the sign could not have been rebuilt if destroyed had the site not been acquired by DOT. Shortly after the introduction of Chapter 479 into the Laws of Florida and the possibility of requiring the nonconforming signs to be purchased by DOT for removal, DOT met with sign companies and developed a format for determining compensation to be paid for removing these nonconforming signs. A copy of the format completed for the sign in issue here was admitted as Exhibit 1. (Form 178-507 4/83) Additionally, Comparative Cost Multipliers (Exhibit 2) is used to determine the inflation caused adjustment to be applied to structures built in earlier years. Exhibit 1 computed the estimated value of the sign in issue at $11,674.53. However, this compensation did not include catwalks or time clock. The removed sign has negligible salvage value.

Recommendation It is recommended that the fair value of the sign in issue be recalculated to add the value of catwalks and time clock to the total before applying the multiplier and that a Final Order be entered finding that total so calculated to be the fair market value of Patrick Media's sign. DONE and ORDERED this 20 day of April, 1992, in Tallahassee, Florida. COPIES FURNISHED: Elizabeth G. Repaal, Esquire Post Office Box 1441 St. Petersburg, FL 33731 Charles G. Gardner, Esquire Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Ben G. Watts Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458 ATTN: Eleanor Turner MS 58 Thornton J. Williams General Counsel Department of Transportation 562 Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458 K. N. AYERS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Desoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 20th day of April, 1992.

USC (2) 42 CFR 24.303(e)42 U.S.C 4652 Florida Laws (1) 479.24
# 2
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. GENE SIMMS, 78-002371 (1978)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 78-002371 Latest Update: Apr. 11, 1979

Findings Of Fact Two signs are located 0.8 mile west of State Road, 79 on Interstate 10, and 0.8 mile east of State Road 79 on Interstate 10. Both signs do not have permits attached to them. Both signs bear messages which are visible from the traveled way of Interstate 10. Neither sign is located within an incorporated municipality or town. Both signs advertise in part Simbo's Restaurant. Mr. Jim Williams, Outdoor Advertising Inspector for the Department of Transportation, testified that he had spoken with Mr. Simms on June 28, 1978. Williams stated that he asked Simms if Simms would remove the signs; however, Williams did not identify the signs to which he was referring. According to Williams, when Simms was asked if he would take the signs down, Simms stated he would leave them up and go to court. There was no substantial and competent evidence introduced that Simms was referring to the signs in question in this case. Both signs were measured by Charles Averitt, a surveyor with the Department of Transportation, and the sign 0.8 mile west of State Road 79 on Interstate 10 was determined to be 16 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of Interstate 10. The sign 0.8 mile east of State Road 79 on Interstate 10 was determined to be 16.5 feet from the edge of the right-of-way of Interstate 10. Gene Simms testified that he was the owner and operator of Simbo's Truck Stop and Restaurant. Simms testified the signs in question were the property of Simms' Enterprises, Inc., and had been at all times pertaining to this complaint. Simms stated that he owned 50 percent of the stock in Simms Enterprises, Inc., and the remainder was owned by his brother, Jimmy Simms. The notice of violation in this cause names Gene Simms as the Respondent.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing Officer recommends that the Department of Transportation take no action regarding the subject DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of March, 1979, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida STEPHEN F. DEAN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of March, 1979. COPIES FURNISHED: Phillip S. Bennet, Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Richard C. Hurst, Administrator Outdoor Advertising Section Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. Gene Simms Simbo's Auto-Truck Stop and Restaurant Route 1, Box 186 Bonifay, Florida 32425

Florida Laws (3) 120.57479.07479.11
# 3
CALUSA CAMPGROUND CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 12-001855 (2012)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Micco, Florida May 21, 2012 Number: 12-001855 Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2013

The Issue Whether the subject sign, owned by Calusa Campground Condominium Association, Inc. (Calusa), is illegally erected because it is (1) located in the right-of-way of the Florida Department of Transportation (the Department) on U.S. Highway 1 in Monroe County, Florida, and/or (2) it does not have a required permit.

Findings Of Fact The Department is an agency of the State of Florida responsible for regulating outdoor advertising signs within 660 feet of certain road systems, including federal-aid primary highways. Calusa is the owner of the subject sign, which is located in Monroe County, Florida, on U.S. Highway 1. The subject sign is located in the Department's right- of-way. U.S. Highway 1 in Monroe County is a federal-aid primary highway, and it has been designated as a scenic highway. With the exception of an "on-premises sign," a permit issued by the Department is required for signs located within 660 feet of a federal-primary highway. The subject sign is not an "on-premises sign." A permit is required for the subject sign. The subject sign does not have the required permit. Calusa was issued a "Notice of Violation - Illegally Erected Sign in Right of Way" on February 23, 2011, and an "Amended Notice of Violation - Illegally Erected Sign in Right of Way" on July 10, 2012. The violations were based on two reasons: (1) the sign lacks required permits, and (2) the sign is unlawfully in the Department's right-of-way. Both notices contained the following: This sign is illegal and must be removed within 10 days from the date of this Notice, pursuant to s. 479.107(1), F.S. If it is not removed within that time, it will be removed and disposed of by the Department without further notice. PLEASE NOTE: If the sign is removed by the Department, all costs associated with the removal will be assessed against the sign owner. . . .

Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Department of Transportation enter a final order finding that the subject sign is illegal and ordering its removal. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of November, 2012, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of November, 2012. COPIES FURNISHED: Kimberly Clark Menchion, Esquire Department of Transportation Mail Station 58 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Michael Healy, Esquire The Silver Law Group, P.A. Post Office Box 710 Islamorada, Florida 33036 Deanna Hurt, Clerk of Agency Proceedings Department of Transportation Mail Station 58 Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Gerald B. Curington, General Counsel Department of Transportation Mail Station 58 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Ananth Prasad, Secretary Department of Transportation Mail Station 57 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Florida Laws (10) 120.569120.57120.68334.03479.01479.07479.105479.107479.11479.16
# 4
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. PATRICK MEDIA GROUP, 88-004933 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-004933 Latest Update: Feb. 10, 1989

Findings Of Fact The sign in issue is owned by the Petitioner, is in existence and is located as shown on Exhibits 1 and 2 along SR 580, 100 feet north of Nebraska Avenue. The sign is located within the city limits of Tampa and is outside the DOT right of way. There is only one face on this sign which faces southwest and can be seen by eastbound traffic on Busch Boulevard (SR 580). SR 580 is a noncontrolled highway and the spacing requirements are not applicable to signs along Busch Boulevard which are otherwise not controlled. Nebraska Avenue (U.S. 41) is a federal-aide primary highway. A sign was originally erected in the same location as the existing sign in 1979 and remained until 1987 when the property on which the sign was erected changed hands. The new owners requested the sign be dismantled and re-erected on property being developed. This was done and the sign was re-erected in 1988 on its original location and of the same size as the original sign. The original sign was exempt from the spacing requirements by virtue of its grandfather status as a nonconforming sign. The sign can readily be seen by motorists traveling north on U.S. 41 (Exhibits 8-10). When the sign was rebuilt it lost its grandfather status and a new sign permit is required. Petitioner presented the only witness who testified that the angle of the sign is intended to give maximum visibility on Busch Boulevard and that the exposure time to a motorist is substantially longer on Busch Boulevard than on Nebraska Avenue. However, the exhibits submitted into evidence show the sign to be at an approximate 45 degree angle to both Busch Boulevard and Nebraska Avenue, that the sign is seen to the left side of a vehicle traveling east on Busch Boulevard and to the right side of a vehicle traveling north on Nebraska Avenue, and that there are more obstructions to the sign's visibility from Busch Boulevard than from Nebraska Avenue. This latter factor would indicate the sign's exposure time from Nebraska Avenue is at least equal to the sign's exposure time from a vehicle traveling along Busch Boulevard.

Florida Laws (2) 479.01479.07 Florida Administrative Code (1) 14-10.007
# 5
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs. HI-WAY ADVERTISING, 88-000884 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-000884 Latest Update: May 09, 1988

Findings Of Fact During an inspection of signs along U. S. 19, a DOT sign inspector observed Respondent's signs 1/2 and 3/4 mile south of C. R. 582 which appeared to be on the right-of-way of U. S. 19. U. S. 19 is a Federal Aid Primary Highway and a part of the State Highway System. The right-of-way of U. S. 19 at this location extends 100 feet east and west of the centerline of U. S. 19 and 50 feet from the edge of the pavement of U. S. 19. Measurements taken from the edge of the pavement of U. S. 19 to the sign 3/4 mile south of C. R. 582 revealed the sign to be 42 feet from the edge of the pavement. The other sign measured 43 feet from the edge of U. S. 19. Accordingly, both signs were on the right-of-way of U. S. 19. Generally, the telephone poles and power line poles are erected along the DOT right-of-way of roads in the State Highway System, and the line of these poles is usually believed to mark the right-of-way boundary. Photographs of Respondent's signs showed those signs to be erected just touching this pole line, but outside that line. Photographs submitted by Respondent also showed other signs clearly on the right-of-way which were not cited as being in violation. One of these signs advertised Job Services of Florida, a state agency. The DOT inspector testified this sign was not cited because he understood state owned signs were exempt from the-no sign on right- of-way statute.

Florida Laws (2) 479.107479.11
# 8

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