|
"I feel the people in Dillsboro who were instrumental in raising such a fuss over this issue should be given credit for this decision," said Nolan, who cautioned area residents not to expect to see a demolition crew at the site any time soon.
"Sign companies have a history of appealing such decisions," he said. "They will probably appeal to the N.C. Supreme Court."
Charles McDarris, the Raleigh attorney handling the case for PNE, was not specific about his client's next move when asked about the decision.
"We have read the decision and are extremely disappointed," McDarris said. "We are considering our alternatives."
Prior to Tuesday's decision, the billboard raised some eyebrows in Dillsboro last week when two advertisements were posted on the sign in violation of appeal procedure requirements. The ads were apparently placed by the sign's new owner, Lamar Outdoor Advertising.
Derrick Collier, Lamar's general manager in Arden, confirmed his company acquired the sign from PNE AOA in January and that he was unaware the sign could not be used for advertising.
"We were not aware of any restrictions," said Collier, who went on to said that he had been made aware by PNE AOA that the legal status of the sign was being litigated.
Once the company learned about the pending lawsuit with Jackson County, they agreed to remove the advertisements, said McDarris, who represents PNE AOA, not Lamar.
"There should not be advertising on that sign," McDarris said Monday. "I've asked (Lamar) to remove the advertisements, and they have agreed to take that action."
Tuesday's appellate court decision, which upholds a lower court decision in favor of Jackson County, apparently means the structure is closer to being "...dismantle[d] and remove[d]" as was ordered by Judge Marlene Hyatt in June 2000.
PNE AOA erected the billboard on U.S. 441 south of Dillsboro without a permit from the Department of Transportation, which at the time was the only agency in Jackson County involved in permitting such structures. According to court records, PNE representative Frank Moody, a 16-year veteran of the outdoor advertising industry, admitted during a deposition that he had never leased a site for a billboard without first securing a DOT permit.
He did so this time, he said, because he'd received assurances from a DOT official that the sign would be permitted after another sign located within the prescribed setback was removed. In fact, PNE believed they had 30 days to remove the smaller sign. But the county's moratorium was adopted a day prior to PNE's request for a permit.
"The board of commissioners passed the Jackson County moratorium on Aug. 19, 1999," Judge McCullough wrote in his decision. "At that time PNE had not yet filed for a permit from DOT, so its sign properly fell under the scope of the moratorium.
"While DOT is not responsible for interpreting the legality of zoning regulations or the legality of moratoriums, it must honor properly passed local rules and moratoriums," he continued.
As for PNE's argument that the county erred by not notifying the public of its intent to enact a moratorium on billboard construction, the court agreed with county attorney Large's agrument that the county's action was based on its general police powers, "...and as such, no notice or public hearing was required."
"PNE next argues that it acted in good faith and had common law vested property rights to erect a sign because it reasonably relied on statements from the (county) that no local permits were required. The (county), on the other hand, argues that PNE did not act in good faith and cannot, therefore, assert common law vested property rights," Judge McCollough wrote. "We agree with (the county)."
As for the claim that PNE's right to due process was violated by the county's moratorium, the court again disagreed with the sign company.
"Defendants correctly pointed out that the board of commissioners' meetings are open to the public, and there is time reserved at each meeting for public comment," McCollough said. "We do not believe that PNE was entitled to notice beyond that given to the general public."
Though the county's battle to regulate signs seems to be over, Dillsboro continues to struggle with the issue. A public hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, Oct. 30, to hear a request for a variance from the owners of the new Best Western motel, who want to erect a sign that does not conform with the town code.
According to Nolan, the request is for a plastic sign held together with a metal frame and lighted from the inside, all violations of the ordinance. The motel owners also wish to place the sign on property that does not belong to them, a violation of the town's restriction on off-premise signs, Nolan said. The town's board of adjustment, which is made up of town board members and Nolan, will hear the request at Dillsboro Town Hall at 5 p.m.
"We are pursuing other sign ordinance issues, as well," said Nolan, who indicated the town's attorney has asked at least one other merchant with what the town has determined to be an illegal sign to conform with the town's ordinance.
|
Not only do the advertisements on this billboard south of Dillsboro have to be removed, but the N.C. Court of Appeals said Tuesday that the entire structure must be removed. PNE AOA, owners of the sign until January, have been in litigation with Jackson County since commissioners enacted a moratorium that prevented the Department of Transportation from retroactively issuing a permit for the sign, which was erected on a weekend without a permit. Although a Wake County judge ruled in October 2000 that the DOT must permit the sign, Tuesday's appellate court ruling would appear to supersede that decision. - Herald photo by Lisa Majors-Duff