Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 32-6-174 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 32-6-174 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 32-6-174

TITLE 32 HIGHWAYS, BRIDGES, AND FERRIES

Section 6. Regulation of Maintenance and Use of Public Roads Generally, 32-6-1 through 32-6-248.

ARTICLE 6 PUBLIC UTILITIES

32-6-174. Promulgation of regulations by department.

The department may promulgate reasonable regulations governing the installation, construction, maintenance, renewal, removal, and relocation of pipes, mains, conduits, cables, wires, poles, towers, tracks, traffic and other such signals, and other equipment and appliances of any utility in, on, along, over, or under any part of the state highway system or any public road project which the department has undertaken or agreed to undertake or which has been completed by the department pursuant to its authority. In addition to the requirements of such department regulations, it shall be the responsibility of the utility to obtain whatever franchise is required by law.

(Code 1933, § 95A-1005, enacted by Ga. L. 1973, p. 947, § 1.)

Law reviews.

- For annual survey of administrative law, see 56 Mercer L. Rev. 31 (2004). For annual survey of local government law, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 289 (2005).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Cited in Georgia Power Co. v. Collum, 176 Ga. App. 61, 334 S.E.2d 922 (1985).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR.

- State regulation of rates to consumers of gas or electricity transported across state lines for light or power purposes, 7 A.L.R. 1094.

Constitutionality of state legislation to reimburse public utilities for cost of relocating their facilities because of highway construction, conditioned upon federal reimbursement of the state under the terms of Federal-Aid Highway Act (23 U.S.C. § 123), 75 A.L.R.2d 419.

Placement, maintenance, or design of standing utility pole as affecting private utility's liability for personal injury resulting from vehicle's collision with pole within or beside highway, 51 A.L.R.4th 602.

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 32-6-174

Total Results: 3  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

City of MacOn v. Alltel Commc'ns, Inc., 596 S.E.2d 589 (Ga. 2004).

Cited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | May 3, 2004 | 277 Ga. 823, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 1522

...invalid so as to preclude the charge of the subject fees in excess of those provided for under Georgia Department of Transportation Rule 672-11-.03. The answer is that the City of Macon ordinance in question is preempted by OCGA §§ 32-4-92(a)(10), 32-6-174, and Georgia Department of Transportation Rule 672-11-.03 to the extent that the permit fees authorized by the ordinance exceed the rate charged by the Georgia Department of Transportation on its rights-of-way, and are otherwise unrelated to...
...er foot per year (the "Amended Ordinance"). [2] *592 Under the Amended Ordinance, the City charges $4.50 per foot per year as a permit fee to all entities for placing wires, cables, and conduits in the rights-of-way of City streets. Pursuant to OCGA § 32-6-174, [3] the DOT has promulgated Rule 672-11-.03 which provides the Permit Fee Schedule for Long Distance and Trunk Communications Cables....
...The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. On September 27, 2002, the district court granted Alltel's motion for summary judgment after concluding that the permit fee set forth in the Amended Ordinance is invalid as preempted by state law pursuant to OCGA *593 §§ 32-4-92(a)(10) [5] , 32-6-174, and DOT Rule 672-11-.03....
...However, the statutory provision clearly limits these regulations in that they must "not be more restrictive with respect to utilities affected thereby than are equivalent regulations [7] promulgated by the [DOT] with respect to utilities on the state highway system under authority of Code Section 32-6-174." OCGA § 32-4-92(a)(10)....
...n that it provides that "such regulations shall not be more restrictive with respect to utilities affected thereby than are equivalent regulations promulgated by the [DOT] with respect to utilities on the state highway system under authority of Code Section 32-6-174." This Court stated, that "[i]t is well settled that a local government's authority to charge fees reasonably related to regulation is implied under its police power," and conversely, that "the power to impose a tax for revenue-producing purposes must be conferred by statute." BellSouth Telecommunications v....
...egulation. BellSouth Telecommunications v. Cobb County, supra at 315(1), 588 S.E.2d 704. However, this Court affirmed that the county's regulations could not be "more restrictive than the Georgia Department of Transportation's regulations under OCGA § 32-6-174." BellSouth Telecommunications v....
...547(1), 433 S.E.2d 698 (1993); City of LaGrange v. Troup County Elec. Membership Corp., 200 Ga.App. 418, 419-420, 408 S.E.2d 708 (1991); see also Ga. Power Co. v. City of Rome, 172 Ga. 14, 23(3), 157 S.E. 283 (1931). The City cites the last line of OCGA § 32-6-174, which states, "[i]n addition to the requirements of such [DOT] regulations, it shall be the responsibility of the utility to obtain whatever franchise is required by law." However, there is no evidence that Alltel sought a franchise or t...
...g in business, therefore, it is a license fee. Camden Tel. &c. Co. v. City of St. Marys, 247 Ga. 687, 689(2), 279 S.E.2d 200 (1981). For the foregoing reasons, it must be concluded that the Amended Ordinance is preempted by OCGA §§ 32-4-92(a)(10), 32-6-174, and Georgia Department of Transportation Rule 672-11-.03....
...18-153. Permit Fee. The fee for such permit shall be four dollars and fifty cents ($4.50) per foot of wire, cable or conduit occupying such street per year. All ordinances or parts thereof in conflict with this provision are hereby repealed. [3] OCGA § 32-6-174 provides: The department may promulgate reasonable regulations governing the installation, construction, maintenance, renewal, removal, and relocation of pipes, mains, conduits, cables, wires, poles, towers, tracks, traffic and other such...
...al limits. However, such regulations shall not be more restrictive with respect to utilities affected thereby than are equivalent regulations promulgated by the department with respect to utilities on the state highway system under authority of Code Section 32-6-174....
Copy

Bellsouth Telecomm., Inc. v. Cobb Cnty., 588 S.E.2d 704 (Ga. 2003).

Cited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 10, 2003 | 277 Ga. 314, 2003 Fulton County D. Rep. 3298

...t fee. This provides a rational basis for Cobb County's classification. Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur. NOTES [1] Cobb County's regulations cannot be more restrictive than the Georgia Department of Transportation's regulations under OCGA § 32-6-174....
Copy

Twiggs Cnty. v. Atlanta Gas Light Co., 262 Ga. 276 (Ga. 1992).

Cited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Jun 12, 1992 | 417 S.E.2d 13, 92 Fulton County D. Rep. 1003

...e limits of a municipality. However, such regulations shall not be more restrictive . . . than are equivalent regulations promulgated by the [Department of Transportation] with respect to utilities on the state highway system under authority of Code Section 32-6-174....