HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-CorrespondenceQts 6, is1 1,2 8
f
Florida Division
U.S.Depar?nent
of Transportation
` Federal Highway
Administration
Ananth Prasad, P.E.
Secretary
Florida Department of Transportation
605 Suwannee Street (MMS-59)
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450
June 17, 201I
545 John Knox Road, Suite 200
Tallahassee, Florida 32303 1 23 i 1l
Phone; (850) 553.2200
Fax. (850) 942-9691 1942-8308
Attention: John Garner, Director, Office of Right of Way
Re: Certification of the City of Miami for Local Cono-ol of Wall Murals
Dear Secretary Prasad:
www. fhwa.dot govtfldiv
La Reply Refer To:
HDA-FL
L.
Thank you for your letter of October I4, 2010, requesting our acknovviedgm.eut of the Florida
Department of Transportation's ('~DOT) proposed certification of the City of Miami (City) for
local control of wall murals, subject. to the conditions outlined in your letter. We appreciate
FDOT aid the City providing us with the historical information which was conthdered in our
assessment. We believe the Ci'y's current ordinance for the proposed control of outdoor
advertising for size, spacing, and lighting of wall murals is not in conformance to the Highway
Beautification Act (HBA). Therefore, we recommend ag:+inst delegating control to the City until
certain issues are addressed.
A local zoning authority, pursuant to 23 U.S.C. § 13 I (d), can establish standards for the size,
lighting, and spacing of outdoor advertising displays that are customarily followed within its area
of control. Ln accordance with 23 CFR 750,706, FDOT may delegate control of outdoor
advertising ising signs to local zoning authorities having appropriate controls to govern size, spacing,
and lighting, The City of Miami qualifies as a local zoning authority.
We do not consider the City's proposed controls of wall murals used for outdoor advertising to
be in conformance with the intent of the A and our longstanding implementing regulations.
The control of wall murals with respect to size, spacing, and lighting cannot occur in isolation
from the other signs, displays, or devices regulated by the I -A in the controlled area, Under
23 CFR 750,706(c)(1), the Iocal zoning authority is supposed to regulate the size, lighting, and
spacing of all outdoor advertising signs in commercial and industrial zones. A wall mural is only
one type of sign, display, or device as defined in 23 CFR 750.703(i). The control of spacing
between murals and all other types of outdoor advert:kHz signs needs to be considered
comprehensively. The submittal did not clearly articulate how effective control would be
comprehensively addressed_
/; -C , //-
1 7c77
-)t -k-c—s pc2J.1 Lee r C '
SUBMITTED INTO THE
PUBLC RECGRD FOR
Ananth Prasad, P.E.
.bane, 17, 2011
2
In addition, although we ,agree that wall murals were in use in Miami prior to the January 1972
Federal -State agreement, we do not believe the 2008 ordinance is consistent with a determination
of customary use, which can help establish the basis for a local zoning authority to have more or
Pecs restrictive controls than those in the Federal -State agreement. The key adjective
"customary" is not defined in the RBA, but a typical definition of the word is found in the
Webster's Nex+ World CoFlege Dictionary 4h edition_ "in keeping with custom, or usage; usual;
habitual. " An ordinance is evidence that a particular use was permissible when the ordinance
was in effect. However, if it is determined that rio such uses existed or were extremely ;united
the City may not declare that based on formula calculation the use was customary, with no
support. Miami apparently did have an ordinance in effect in 1972 that, based on a formula
calculation, allowed some oversized signs on buildings. The submitted documentation
demonstrated that some oversized murals may have existed in Miami prior to the Federal -State
afferent, but in such few numbers that it cannot be said that such use was customary.
The deternz.irr•.ation of customary use for Miami wall murals allows a variance from the
Federal -State agreement, but the City cannot revise its outdoor advertising controls arbitrarily
over time if the revision is based upon unsupported customary use prior to the 1972
Federal -State agreement. The selection of 10,000 square feet as a maximum size for each mural
location appears to be arbitrary. The City's 19.65 ordinance had inherent size limitations based
on a formula calculation with respect to the dimensions of a given bui]di L. Some buildings
precluded the ability for a painted mural to be 10,000 square feet in size, while undoubtedly
other buildings had dimensions that allowed this size mural. We believe maintaining the formula
calculation, for size provided in the 1965 ordinance could be an appropriate basis for a
determination of customary use; we do not see a logical hasis for selecting 10,000 square feet as
he magnum. Even with using the formula calculation, it needs to be shown that the use of
such oversized murals was customary.
Regarding the control of spacing between signs, we have already stated that the spacing of
murals needs to be considered in he context of spacing between murals and all other outdoor
advertising. Although we agree with the City that its 2008 ordinance is more restrictive than its
1965 ordinance that did not address spacing (e.g., allowed multiple murals on a single building),
there is no customary use determination here. Without a valid determination. of customary use
on which to base its 2008 ordinance, and c`.onsidering that murals currently are not controlled
with respect to spacing among all outdoor advertising, we believe the Federal -State agreement's
spac•:r.g criteria would control.
For the delegation of local control to the City of Ivliami, we believe the City wbud need to
I) work jointly with FDOT to ensure all outdoor advertising devices arc controlled for size,
spacing, and lighting, and not just wall rrurals as a stand-alone category; 2) restore its ordinance
to the formula method for controlling size that was used in its 1965 ordinance; and 3) adhere to
the spacing criteria in the Federal -State agreement. The FDOT should conduct a review of any
existing wall murals currently located along controlled routes to ensure they are permitted in
accordance with the Federal -State agreement for size, spacing, and lighting As you indicated in
your letter, FDOT ultimately remains responsible far the effective control of outdoor advertising
throughout the State, even if delegated to a local zoning authority such as the City of Miami.
UbMJTE. INJQ5HF
�JLIC RECO1..
. Jr‘
,ti+6E7 r'` of ,
;�
,046
r Y
Anarzth Prasad, P.E. 3
June, 17, 2011
We look forward to continuing our partnership to promote the safety and recreational value of
public travel and preserve the natural beauty of Florida, If you have any Rather questions or
comments, please contact Mr. Brian Telfair of our office at (85C) 553-2228.
Sincerely,
artin . Knopp
Division Administrator
cc. Mr. John Garner, Director, Office of Right of Way, FDOT (MS-22)
Mr. Jerry Curington, General Counsel, FDOT (MS-58)
Mr. Nelson Castellanos, FHWA-HEPR-?
Mr. Robert Black, FHWA-HHC-30
Mr. David Gibbs, FH WA-DFSS
Ms. Karen Brunelle, FHWA-FLDW
Mr. Brian Tclfair, FHWA-FLDIV
Mr. David Hawk, FHWA-FLDIV
SUBMTTED INTO THE
PUBLIC RECORD FOR
RICK SCOTT
GOVERNOR
Florida .Department of Transportation
605 Suwannee Street
Taitabacset, FL 32399-0450
June 30, 2011
Johnny Martinez
City Manager
City of Miami
P.D. Box 330708
Miami, FL 33233-0708
Re:Request for Certification for Control of Wall Murals
Dear Mr. Martinez:
ANA.*TH PRASAD, P.E.
sEU ET_ .RY
As you are aware, the Department notified Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on
October 14, 2010, of our proposal to certify the City of /vIiami for the control of wall murals
in accordance with your earlier re nest. On June 20, 2011, we received the attached reply.
As you can see, FHWA has racormnend.ed against this action until certain issues are
addressed.
At your e sliest convenience, please let us know ow the City wot'd propose to address the
issues raised by FHWA. We are available to meet with you regarding this issue if you feel it
would be helpful_
Please let me lmow if you have questions or if I can be of assistance.
rFWAL—""
A_nanth Prasad, P.B.
Secretary
Attachment
cc: Martin Knopp, Federal Highway Administration
John Garner, Director, Office of Right of Way
www. d o t_state.fl. us
SUBMTTED INTO THE
PUBLIC RECORD FOR
FRC_ C y
SUBMITTED INTQ THE
IOVWr PUBLIC RECORD FOR