HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaawxp0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCUMENT RESO'aE
05416 - [B0885818]
Obstacles to Billboard Removal. CED-78-38; E-164M9713). February
27, lc78. 28 pp. + 4 appendices (4 pp.).
Report to the Cong7ess; by Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General.
Issue Area: Transportation Systems anC Policies: National
Bighway System (2409).
Contact: Community and Economic Development Div.
Budget Function: Commerce and Transportation: Ground
Transportation (404).
Organization Concerned: Department of Transportatian; Federal
Highway Administration.
Congressional Relevance: Boise Coam..ttee on Public Works and
Transportation; Senate Committee on Environment ,nd Public
works; Congress.
Authority: Bighway Beautification Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-295; 23
U.S.C. 131). Frderal-Aid Highwdy Act of 1958.
The Highway Beautification Act of 1965 encouraged
States to control outdoor advertising according to national
standards and provided for the iorfeit of 10% of Federa highway
funds for noncompliance, The act %xeapts signs which are located
on-premise or in zoned and unzone1 industrial and commerical
areas and meet State permit requirements as to size, lighting,
and spacing. Fiudings/Conclusions: Since the act's passage,
States h&ve reported removing about 440,000 signs at a cost of
about $82 million to the Federal Government. Illegal signs were
ramoved witL relative ease, but only about 78,000 of 298,000
s ,4.ns which were legal but did not comply with State laws passed
afcur the Federal act were removed as of March 31, 1977. It
could take an additional 21 years to remove all these
nonconforming signs and could cost over a billion dollars.
Objectives of the program may not be reached because of lack of
support, legal complexities, #h3 numercas exemptions, and
differences in State and local rules. The most significant
exception to the sign removal law is for siga.s that are on
premises. Zoning has a significant effect on highway signs
because areas are often zoned for commercial or industrial use
even though they have not been developed for these uses.
Recommendations: The Congress should reassess the sign removal
program and, if it wants to strengthen it, encourage the States
to: remove all signs except those on-premise and landmark signs;
or remove all signs, except on-premise signs, landmark signs,
and signs in areas of actual commercial or industrial use. (HTW)](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaawxp0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)