C.F.R. » Title 23 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER H—RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ENVIRONMENT › PART 750—HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION › Subpart G—Outdoor Advertising Control

23 C.F.R. § 750.705

Effective control

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

In order to provide effective control of outdoor advertising, the State must:

(a) Prohibit the erection of new signs other than those which fall under § 750.704(a)(1) through (6);

(b) Assure that signs erected under § 750.704(a)(4) and (5) comply, at a minimum, with size, lighting, and spacing criteria contained in the agreement between the Secretary and the State;

(c) Assure that signs erected under § 750.704(a)(1) comply with the national standards contained in subpart B, part 750, chapter I, 23 CFR;

(d) Remove illegal signs expeditiously;

(e) Remove nonconforming signs with just compensation within the time period set by 23 U.S.C. 131 (subpart D, part 750, chapter I, 23 CFR, sets forth policies for the acquisition and compensation for such signs);

(f) Assure that signs erected under § 750.704(a)(6) comply with § 750.710, Landmark Signs, if landmark signs are allowed;

(g) Establish criteria for determining which signs have been erected with the purpose of their message being read from the main-traveled way of an Interstate or primary highway, except where State law makes such criteria unnecessary. Where a sign is erected with the purpose of its message being read from two or more highways, one or more of which is a controlled highway, the more stringent of applicable control requirements will apply;

(h) Develop laws, regulations, and procedures to accomplish the requirements of this subpart;

(i) Establish enforcement procedures sufficient to discover illegally erected or maintained signs shortly after such occurrence and cause their prompt removal; and

(j) Submit regulations and enforcement procedures to FHWA for approval.

[40 FR 42844, Sept. 16, 1975; 40 FR 49777, Oct. 24, 1975]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1984–2016 · leading case: Scenic Am., Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 836 F.3d 42 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Scenic Am., Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 836 F.3d 42 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (h). States must submit these laws, regulations, and procedures to the FHWA’s regional offices, known as Division Offices, for approval.”
Boyce Indus., Inc. v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 670 S.W.2d 147 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “In order to maintain and continue a nonconforming sign, 23 CFR § 750.705 (d)(4) provides “The sign must have been lawful on the effective date of the State law or regu *151 lations, and must continue to be lawfully maintained.”
Orsinger Outdoor Advert., Inc. v. Dep't of Highways, 752 P.2d 55 (Colo. 1988). “23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (b) (1987). In addition to granting the department the authority to enter into agreements with the Department of Transportation with respect to outdoor highway advertising, the Outdoor Advertising Act authorizes the department to adopt regulations and…”
Scenic Am., Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 983 F. Supp. 2d 170 (D.D.C. 2013). “§ 131 (b); 23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (b), suggesting that there is no causal connection between FHWA action and the existence of digital billboards.”
Hulshof v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 737 S.W.2d 726 (Mo. 1987). “060(3)(C), removal of the sign is mandated by 23 CFR 750.705(d). See Boyce Industries, Inc.”
Scenic Arizona v. City of Phoenix Bd. of Adjustment, 268 P.3d 370 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “The memorandum was written to “Division Administrators” and explained at the outset that pursuant to 23 C.F.R. 750.705, a state department of transportation must obtain FHWA approval of “any changes to its laws, regulations, and procedures to implement the requirements of its…”
Pima Cnty. v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., 127 P.3d 64 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “§ 131 (g), 23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (d), and 42 U.S.C. § 4601 (D) in support.”
Chancellor Media Whiteco Outdoor Corp. v. Dot, 796 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “Many of those conditions are spelled out in federal regulations, 23 C.F.R. §§ 750.705 et seq., which specify how states are to control outdoor advertising along interstate and federal-aid highways, in order to be considered in "effective control" of outdoor advertising.”
Scenic Am., Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 49 F. Supp. 3d 53 (D.D.C. 2014). “23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (h). All 50 States have done this as well.”
Whiteco Metrocom v. Dep't of Transp., 616 A.2d 193 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “23 C.F.R. § 750.705 . The pertinent section of the agreement states: The standards herein contained pertaining to the size, spacing and lighting of signs permitted in zoned and *161 unzoned commercial or industrial areas shall apply only to those signs erected subsequent to the…”
Pima Cnty. v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). “§ 131 (g), 23 C.F.R. § 750.705 (d), and 42 U.S.C. § 4601 (D) in support.”
Osage Outdoor Advert., Inc. v. State High. Comm'n, 696 S.W.2d 805 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985). “23 CFR § 750.705 requires the states to remove illegal signs expeditiously and to establish enforcement procedures to discover illegally erected or maintained signs shortly after such occurrence and to cause their prompt removal.”
— 23 C.F.R. § 750.705(d) — 1 case
Hulshof v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 737 S.W.2d 726 (Mo. 1987). “060(3)(C), removal of the sign is mandated by 23 CFR 750.705(d). See Boyce Industries, Inc.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.