Findings Of Fact On or about July 31, 1987, a DOT sign inspector observed a sign opposite Respondent's place of business advertising Respondent's business, which appeared to be on the DOT right-of-way of U.S. 19 in Hernando County. Measurements to place the sign in relation to U.S. 19 were taken. The right-of-way of U.S. 19 at this location, as determined by a DOT right-of-way marker 1000 feet south of Respondent's sign and the DOT right-of- way map, shows the right- of-way to extend 55 feet west of the edge of the pavement of U.S. 19. The sign at issue was located 46 feet from the edge of the pavement placing the sign 9 feet inside the DOT right-of-way line.
The Issue Whether the Respondent is in violation of s. 479.07(1), Florida Statutes, a law which requires that a permit be applied for, granted, and renewed each year as a regulation for outdoor advertising in the State of Florida.
Findings Of Fact The following described sign had no valid permit tag for the years 1974-1975, 1976-1977: A two-faced sign, one face north and one face south, located on SR 33 at the junction of SR 48 with copy "Clear Lake Campground". Notice of violation regarding the subject sign was properly sent by the Department of Transportation and received by the Respondent. A hearing was requested by the Respondent through Linda Vernon, Wildwood, Florida. A notice was duly sent and the time set for 10:00 A.M. The hearing officer postponed this hearing until 1:00 P.M. awaiting the arrival of a representative of the Respondent. There was no appearance.
Recommendation Remove subject signs ten (10) days after date of final order unless said signs are previously removed by the Respondent. DONE and ORDERED this 18th day of June, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Mr. O. E. Black, Administrator Outdoor Advertising Section Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Philip Bennett, Esquire Office of Legal Operations Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. C. W. Lichtenberger Post Office Box 47 DeLand, Florida 32720
Findings Of Fact On or about July 31, 1987, a DOT sign inspector observed Respondent's sign apparently on the right-of-way of U.S. 19, 1000 feet south of Sunset Road in Pasco County. The right-of-way of U.S. 19 at this location on the east side of U.S. 19 extends 32 feet from the eastern edge of the paved lane. The sign was located 25 feet from the eastern edge of the paved lane. Respondent admitted that the sign was in the right- of-way the day the inspector was there, but was relocated there without their knowledge or consent by the contractor paving the parking lot. Davis Center gave Respondent permission to place their sign (Exhibit 2 and 3) on its property. The center is in the process of repaving its parking area in stages so as not to block off all parking at one time. To clear the area for the paving equipment the contractor moved Respondent's sign to the grassy area alongside the parking lot. As soon as Respondent learned its sign had been placed on the right-of-way, it removed the sign from the right-of-way.
Findings Of Fact Petitioner applied for a permit to erect a sign along the north side of SR 688, 500 feet west of U.S. 19 facing east (Exhibit 1). This application was disapproved because the proposed location is within 1000 feet of an existing sign along SR 688, facing in the same direction. With respect to outdoor advertising signs the character of SR 688 and U.S. 19 change at their intersection. North of SR 688 U.S. 19 is a federal-aid primary highway, south of SR 688 U.S. 19 is a federal-aid urban highway. For sign permitting purposes U.S. 19 is a controlled highway north of SR 688 and an uncontrolled highway south of SR 688. Similarly, SR 688 is a federal-aid primary highway east of U.S. 19 and is uncontrolled west of U.S. 19. A duly permitted sign, facing east, is located along the north side of SR 688 approximately 200 feet east of U.S. 19. This sign is within 1000 feet of the location for which Petitioner seeks the permit at issue in these proceedings. The proposed sign is intended to serve westbound traffic along SR 688; however, the sign can be seen by motorists traveling on U.S. 19 while stopped in the middle of the intersection of SR 688 and U.S. 19, but the message on the sign would be unreadable to the naked eye. Respondent contends the proposed sign is governed by the spacing requirements because the sign is located within 660 feet of the right-of-way of the federal-aid primary highway portion of U.S. 19.
The Issue Whether a sign owned by Respondent and located on the northbound side of 27, at 853 U.S. 27 South, Lake Placid, Florida, is located in the road right-of-way, and must be removed.
Findings Of Fact The Florida Department of Transportation (DOT) is the state agency charged with the duty to administer and enforce the provisions of Chapter 479, Florida Statutes, which regulates outdoor advertising structures along the state highway system. U.S. 27 in Highlands County, Florida, is a part of the state highway system, and title to the right-of-way for said highway is held in the name of the State. Respondent is the owner, and maintains a two sided sign structure (sign) located at 853 U.S. Highway 27 South, Lake Placid, Florida, in Highlands County, which has been erected in the DOT right of way of U.S. Highway 27, inventory section 44, approximately 300 feet South on the North bound side of the highway. The sign is approximately 8 foot by 8 foot made of wood with wooden poles, and contains the advertising copy: "Mrs. CLAIR Psychic...Tarot...Palms...(Se habla espanol)", followed by a telephone number. On March 22, 1991, Respondent was served with a Notice of Violation from the DOT concerning said sign, and was advised that said sign was erected in violation of Florida law, and must be removed within ten working days of the notice. Said sign is presently standing in the DOT right-of-way, as of the date of the formal hearing.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent's request for an exemption from the provisions of Section 479.11(8), Florida Statutes, be DENIED and that Respondent be ordered to remove said sign from the DOT right of way, in accordance with the provisions of Section 479.107, Florida Statutes. DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of December, 1991, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904)488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 23rd day of December, 1991. Copies furnished: Jay O. Barber, Esq. Assistant General Counsel Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Laura Uwanawich Mrs. Clair 853 U.S. 27 South Lake Placid, FL 33852 Ben G. Watts, Secretary Attn: Eleanor F. Turner, M.S. #58 Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458 Thornton J. Williams General Counsel Department of Transportation 562 Haydon Burns Building 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0458
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner owned property including structures used for his dwelling and for his business which was located within the right-of-way of an interstate highway being constructed by the Respondent, Department of Transportation. The Petitioner and the Department negotiated with respect to the amount of compensation that Petitioner was entitled to receive. The Department located a residential dwelling which it contended was comparable to Petitioner's. Petitioner accepted the dwelling located by the Department as comparable for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation that Petitioner was entitled to receive. Petitioner elected, however, to construct a new dwelling on other property that he owned. Petitioner was compensated as if he had purchased the comparable dwelling and was compensated an additional $829 for "incidental expenses" beyond the replacement value as established by the comparable dwelling. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to be compensated for the cost of a "origination fee" which resulted from Petitioner's having to arrange financing. Although improperly labeled, it appears that Petitioner did receive adequate compensation for the loan origination fee. Petitioner received a check from the Department for a "replacement housing payment" which included the origination fee which Petitioner contends he was entitled to receive. While the replacement housing payment was not broken up so as to reflect these fees, it was calculated to include them. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to receive incidental expenses beyond those that he has already received in the amount of $2,068.23. Petitioner has received a payment for incidental expenses in the amount of $829, which includes expenses for a survey, sketch and description, loan application fee, title insurance, attorney's fees, and recording fees. Petitioner actually incurred incidental expenses beyond those for which he was compensated. These additional fees resulted, however, from the fact that Petitioner elected to construct a new residence rather than to accept the comparable residence located by the Department. Because Petitioner was constructing a new residence, it was necessary for him to incur some expenses which would not have been incurred had he accepted the comparable dwelling located by the Department. These expenses included costs of obtaining a rezoning of his property, costs of various construction permits, the cost of obtaining a construction loan, and the cost of a builder's risk insurance policy. While the Petitioner actually incurred these costs, they were costs that he would not have incurred if he had elected to accept the comparable dwelling located by the Department. Petitioner did accept the comparable dwelling for the purpose of setting the amount of benefits that he was entitled to receive.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That a final order be entered by the Department of Transportation denying the application of the Petitioner, John D. Lawrence, for additional relocation assistance benefits. RECOMMENDED this 2nd day of August, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. G. STEVEN PFEIFFER Assistant Director Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 2nd day of August, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Mr. John D. Lawrence c/o Manatee Tropical Foliage Post Office Box 206 Parrish, Florida 33564 Charles G. Gardner Esquire Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Paul N. Pappas Secretary Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Findings Of Fact On or about August 11, 1987, a DOT sign inspector observed a portable sign opposite Respondent's place of business advertising Respondent's business and exhibiting Respondent's telephone number, which appeared to be on the right- of-way of U.S. 41 in Pasco County. The right-of-way of U.S. 41 at this location extends fifty feet east and west of the centerline of U.S. 41 and 38 feet from the edge of the paved lane on the east side of U.S. 41. Respondent's sign was located 28 feet from the edge of the northbound lane of U.S. 41, some 10 feet inside the eastern right-of-way line at this location. Respondent has occupied the same building for the past 10 or 11 years and the sign, which is portable, has been in the same location since she opened her salon. No one ever told Respondent that the sign was located on the DOT right-of-way before the sign was cited for the violation. As soon as she was advised the sign was illegal Respondent relocated the sign off the right-of-way.
Findings Of Fact Six signs were described in a violation notice to Respondent Dandy Signs from Petitioner, Florida Department of Transportation dated July 7, 1977. The notice stated the signs were alleged to be in violation of Chapter 479 and rules 14-10.04; rule 14-10.03. By stipulation of the parties the charges on the signs listed were dropped except for the following two signs: a sign located one mile west of U.S. 1, State Road 44, Mile Post 28.25 with copy "Bob's Sandpiper Restaurant" and a sign located at Junction 17-92 Deland, U.S. Highway 17 (Section 35 Mile Post .02) with copy "Buddy Sheats". The foregoing signs have no permit and evidence was presented to show that each sign is nearer to a permitted sign than 500 feet. The Respondent admits that neither sign has been permitted and that both signs violate the spacing requirements. Respondent was given time to submit evidence that the signs had at one time been permitted, but no evidence was submitted to this hearing officer although the hearing was held in excess of three months before this order is being entered.
Recommendation Remove the subject signs and invoke penalty under Section 479.18, Florida Statutes. DONE and ENTERED this 3rd day of March, 1978. DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 3rd day of March, 1978. COPIES FURNISHED: Philip S. Bennett, Esquire Florida Department of Transportation Haydon Burns Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Dan Richardson, Owner Dandy Signs 324 Flagler Street New Smyrna Beach, Florida 32069
Findings Of Fact On June 18, 1986, Department of Transportation sign inspector observed a sign advertising Michael's Foods along U.S. 19 35 feet east of the edge of the pavement of U.S. 19. The easterly boundary of the right-of-way of U.S. 19 at this location is 57 feet east of the edge of the pavement. U.S. 19 is a federal-aid primary highway.
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
