2020 Georgia Code
Title 32 - Highways, Bridges, and Ferries
Chapter 6 - Regulation of Maintenance and Use of Public Roads Generally
Article 3 - Control of Signs and Signals
Part 1 - Public Roads Generally
§ 32-6-51. Unauthorized Devices and Structures Within Right of Way or Visible From Public Road; Bus Shelters; Commercial Advertisements by Transit Agency

1. 1. It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, place, or maintain within the dedicated right of way of any public road any sign, signal, or other device except as authorized by this subsection or subsection (d) of this Code section or as required or authorized by Code Section 32-6-50 or any other law.
   2. The erection, placement, and maintenance of signs within the dedicated rights of way of county roads or municipal streets may be authorized and governed by ordinances adopted by governing authorities of counties and municipalities having jurisdiction over such roads or streets, which ordinances as to such dedicated rights of way of county roads or municipal streets may be as or less restrictive than the provisions of paragraph (1) of this subsection.
2. It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, place, or maintain in a place or position visible from any public road any unauthorized sign, signal, device, or other structure which:
   1. Imitates, resembles, or purports to be an official traffic-control device;
   2. Hides from view or interferes with the effectiveness of any official traffic-control device;
   3. Obstructs a clear view from any public road to any other portion of such public road, to intersecting or adjoining public roads, or to property abutting such public road in such a manner as to constitute a hazard to traffic on such roads; or
   4. Because of its nature, construction, or operation, constitutes a dangerous distraction to or interferes with the vision of drivers of motor vehicles.
3. Any sign, signal, device, or other structure erected, placed, or maintained on the dedicated right of way of any public road in violation of subsection (a) or (b) of this Code section or in violation of any ordinance adopted pursuant to subsection (a) of this Code section is declared to be a public nuisance, and the officials having jurisdiction of the public road affected may remove or direct the removal of the same. Where any sign, signal, device, or other structure is erected, placed, or maintained in violation of subsection (b) of this Code section, but not on the dedicated right of way of any public road, the officials having jurisdiction of the public road affected may order the removal of such structure by written notice to the owner of the structure or the owner of the land on which the structure is located. If such structure is not removed within 30 days after the giving of such order of removal, such officials are authorized to remove or cause to be removed such structure and to submit a statement of expenses incurred in the removal to the owner of the structure or to the owner of the land on which the structure is located. If payment or arrangement to make payment is not made within 60 days after the receipt of said statement, the department shall certify the amount thereof for collection to the Attorney General.
4. 1. As used in this subsection, the term:
      1. "Bus shelter" means a shelter or bench located at bus stops for the convenience of passengers of public transportation systems owned and operated by governmental units or public authorities or located on county or municipality rights of way for the convenience of residents.
      2. "Commercial advertisements" means any printed or painted signs or multiple media displays on a bus shelter for which space has been rented or leased from the owner of such shelter.
      3. "Multiple media display" means a device by which the message, image, or text is capable of electronic alteration by movement or rotation of panels or slats.
   2. Bus shelters, including those on which commercial advertisements are placed, may be erected and maintained on the rights of way of public roads subject to the following conditions and requirements:
      1. Any public transit system wishing to erect and maintain a bus shelter on the right of way of a state road shall apply to the department for a permit, and as a condition of the issuance of the permit, the department must approve the bus shelter building plans and the location of the bus shelter on the right of way; provided, however, that such approval is subject to any and all restrictions imposed by Title 23, U.S.C., and Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations relating to the federal-aid system. This paragraph shall entitle only public transit systems or their designated agents the right to be issued permits under this paragraph;
      2. If the bus shelter is to be located on the right of way of a public road other than a state road within a county or municipality, application for permission to erect and maintain such shelter shall be made to the respective county or municipality. Such application shall conform to the county's and municipality's regulations governing the erection and maintenance of such structures. When the county or municipality is served by a public transit agency or authority, the applications for all bus shelters on routes of such agency or authority shall also be forwarded by the applicant to such transit agency or authority and subject to the approval of such agency or authority; and
      3. As a condition of issuing a permit for the erection of a bus shelter on the right of way of a state road, the department shall require that the bus shelter shall be properly maintained and that its location shall meet minimum setback requirements as follows:
         1. Where a curb and gutter are present, there shall be a minimum of four feet clearance from the face of the curb to any portion of the bus shelter or the bus shelter shall be placed at the back of the existing concrete sidewalk; or
         2. Where no curb or gutter is present, the front of the bus shelter shall be at least ten feet from the edge of the main traveled roadway.
   3. Any bus shelter erected and maintained on the right of way of a public road in violation of paragraph (2) of this subsection or in violation of the conditions of the permit issued by the department or in violation of the conditions of the consent of the county or municipality is declared to be a public nuisance and if it is determined to be a hazard to public safety by the department, county, or municipality, it may be removed or its removal may be ordered by the department or the governing authority of the respective county or municipality. In every case of removal of a bus shelter as a hazard to public safety by the department, a county, or a municipality, a good faith attempt shall be made to notify the owner of its removal. In such cases where the department, county, or municipality orders the removal of the bus shelter as a public nuisance, if such a bus shelter is not removed by its owner within 30 days after its owner has been issued a written order of removal by the department or the governing authority of the respective county or municipality, the department or the governing authority of the respective county or municipality may cause the bus shelter to be removed and submit a statement of expenses incurred in the removal to the owner of the bus shelter. In the case of a statement of expenses for removal of a shelter on a state road, if payment or arrangement to make payment is not made within 60 days after the receipt of such statement, the department shall certify the amount thereof to the Attorney General for collection.
   4. The person to whom a permit has been issued for the erection and maintenance of a bus shelter on the right of way of a public road or who places such shelter on a public road other than a state road shall at all times assume all risks for the bus shelter and shall indemnify and hold harmless the State of Georgia, the department, and any county or municipality against all losses or damages resulting solely from the existence of the bus shelter.
   5. Permits for shelters on state roads shall be issued under this subsection only to cities, counties, or public transportation authorities owning or operating public transportation systems or their designated agents.
5. Each sign erected, placed, or maintained in violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this Code section shall constitute a separate offense.
6. Any person who violates paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be punished the same as for littering under Code Section 16-7-43. Any person who violates subsection (b) of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
7. 1. As used in this subsection, the term:
      1. "Commercial advertisements" means any printed or painted signs or multiple media displays on or in transit vehicles or facilities for which space has been rented or leased from the owner of such transit vehicles or facilities.
      2. "Multiple media display" means a device by which the message, image, or text is capable of electronic alteration by movement or rotation of panels or slats.
      3. "Transit agency" means any public agency, public corporation, or public authority existing under the laws of this state that is authorized by any general, special, or local law to provide any type of transit services within any area of this state, including, but not limited to, the Department of Transportation, the Atlanta-region Transit Link "ATL" Authority, and the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority.
      4. "Transit vehicles or facilities" means everything necessary and appropriate for the conveyance and convenience of passengers who utilize transit services.
   2. A transit agency may authorize the placement, erection, and maintenance of commercial advertisements on or in transit vehicles or facilities owned or operated by that transit agency and said placement of commercial advertisements shall not be considered conducting commercial enterprises or activities in violation of Code Section 32-6-115.
8. Multiple media displays authorized pursuant to this Code section shall comply with the operational standards for multiple message signs provided for in Part 2 of this article but shall not be required to comply with any spacing requirements provided for in such part and multiple media displays shall not be considered in regard to the spacing requirements provided for in Code Section 32-6-75 as to the placement of any multiple message sign.

(Ga. L. 1931, p. 221, §§ 1, 2, 4, 5; Code 1933, §§ 95-2002, 95-2004, 95-2005, 95-2006; Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 556, § 38; Code 1933, § 95A-902, enacted by Ga. L. 1973, p. 947, § 1; Ga. L. 1991, p. 1861, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 1504, § 1; Ga. L. 1993, p. 1732, § 1; Ga. L. 2001, Ex. Sess., p. 335, § 5; Ga. L. 2005, p. 601, § 3/SB 160; Ga. L. 2006, p. 275, § 3-10/HB 1320; Ga. L. 2009, p. 302, § 2/HB 101; Ga. L. 2016, p. 148, § 1/SB 307; Ga. L. 2017, p. 774, § 32/HB 323; Ga. L. 2018, p. 377, § 4-13/HB 930.)

The 2017 amendment, effective May 9, 2017, part of an Act to revise, modernize, and correct the Code, inserted a comma following "area of this state" in subparagraph (g)(1)(C).

The 2018 amendment, effective May 3, 2018, substituted "Atlanta-region Transit Link 'ATL' Authority" for "Georgia Regional Transportation Authority" near the end of subparagraph (g)(1)(C).

- Placement of election campaign posters, signs, and advertisements within right of way of public roads, § 21-1-1.

Further provisions regarding display of unauthorized traffic signs, signals, or other markings, § 40-6-25.

- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1991, "federal-aid system" was substituted for "Federal-aid system" at the end of the first sentence in subparagraph (d)(2)(A).

- Ga. L. 2006, p. 275, § 1-1/HB 1320, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: "This Act shall be known and may be cited as the 'Comprehensive Litter Prevention and Abatement Act of 2006.'"

Ga. L. 2006, p. 275, § 5-1/HB 1320, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that the Act shall become effective April 21, 2006, for purposes of adopting local ordinances to become effective on or after July 1, 2006.

- For article, "Recommendations Regarding Control of Outdoor Advertising Along the Interstate Highway System in Georgia," see 14 Mercer L. Rev. 308 (1963). For annual survey of trial practice and procedure, see 57 Mercer L. Rev. 381 (2005).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Department's duty to design, manage, and improve state highway system.

- When the charge in question does in fact state that the Department of Transportation (DOT) has "general responsibility to design, manage and improve the state highway system," it seems to capture the essence of the sections the defendant relies upon, which are in fact very broad, general descriptions of the duties of the DOT. The additional material used by the court is drawn from the more specific statutory description of the respective duties of the DOT and municipalities. Thus, O.C.G.A. § 32-2-2 does indeed mention the general duty of the DOT to "designate, improve, manage, control, construct, and maintain." Banks v. City of Brunswick, 529 F. Supp. 695 (S.D. Ga. 1981), aff'd, 667 F.2d 97 (11th Cir. 1982).

Nothing in O.C.G.A. § 32-6-50 or O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51 prohibits the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT) from delegating responsibility to erect and maintain traffic control signs to a private contractor through a construction contract; § 32-6-50 does not saddle DOT with ultimate responsibility for installing and maintaining traffic control devices on all county and municipal road systems. Comanche Constr., Inc. v. DOT, 272 Ga. App. 766, 613 S.E.2d 158 (2005).

- Railroad's bridge, which partially blocked traffic lights at a nearby intersection, did not infringe on the public right-of-way, where the space provided by the bridge for the public right-of-way adequately allowed for the safe and unimpeded flow of traffic thereunder and the traffic lights were not part of the bridge's structure. City of Fairburn v. Cook, 188 Ga. App. 58, 372 S.E.2d 245, cert. denied, 188 Ga. App. 911, 372 S.E.2d 245 (1988).

- O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51 did not prohibit a contractor from designing and establishing a detour route under a contract with the Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT), subject to DOT's approval and inspection. Comanche Constr., Inc. v. DOT, 272 Ga. App. 766, 613 S.E.2d 158 (2005).

Party asserting that structure on private property is unauthorized must establish this fact by showing that the structure was erected or maintained in violation of some statute, code, or local ordinance. Smith v. Hiawassee Hdwe. Co., 167 Ga. App. 70, 305 S.E.2d 805 (1983); Whidby v. Mr. B's Food Mart, 182 Ga. App. 408, 356 S.E.2d 78 (1987).

- O.C.G.A. §§ 32-6-50 and32-6-51 work in conjunction to abrogate a railroad's common law duty to install devices to warn of approaching trains at grade crossings. CSX Transp., Inc. v. Trism Specialized Carriers, Inc., 182 F.3d 788 (11th Cir. 1999).

Because the Georgia Code of Public Transportation, O.C.G.A. § 32-1-1 et seq., abrogated any common law duty on the part of defendant railroad to install adequate signal equipment at a railroad crossing where the driver's car was struck by a train, the common law negligence claim asserted by plaintiffs, the driver's survivors, was dismissed for failure to state a claim; under O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51, the railroad company would have acted in violation of Georgia law if the company erected traffic signals on the public road unless the company was required or authorized to do so by O.C.G.A. §§ 32-6-50 and32-6-51(d), or some "other law," and O.C.G.A. § 32-6-200 delegated responsibility for the installation of protective devices on public roads to the appropriate governmental entity. Bentley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 437 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (N.D. Ga. 2006).

- Structures on private property adjoining road rights-of-way only become unlawful if the structures both obstruct a clear view of roads in such a manner as to constitute a traffic hazard and are unauthorized. Smith v. Hiawassee Hdwe. Co., 167 Ga. App. 70, 305 S.E.2d 805 (1983).

- While the greenery may have caused some obstruction of vision, there existed no competent evidence that any possible obstruction in visibility did, in fact, cause or contribute to the collision; whereas, the evidence presented created a strong probability that a jury could find that the negligence of the driver was the sole proximate cause of the collision. Howard v. Gourmet Concepts Int'l, Inc., 242 Ga. App. 521, 529 S.E.2d 406 (2000).

Trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of a landowner in a negligence suit brought by a parent, who asserted that overgrowth on the landowner's property at an intersection obscured the view of the parent's child and caused the accident that killed the child as the parent failed to establish that the landowner violated O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51(b) with regard to having overgrown foliage on the property at the intersection and, otherwise, failed to show any breach of duty on the landowner's part. Rachels v. Thompson, 290 Ga. App. 115, 658 S.E.2d 890 (2008), cert. denied, No. S08C1188, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 778 (Ga. 2008).

- Cases involving a landowner's liability for vision-obstructing objects on property abutting a railroad crossing are governed by O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51 and the statute applies to allegedly unauthorized vision-obstructing trees. United Refrigerated Servs., Inc. v. Emmer, 218 Ga. App. 865, 463 S.E.2d 535 (1995).

- Town was entitled to summary judgment in a survivor's action claiming damages from the survivor's decedent's fatal collision with a train because the allegedly vision-obstructing vegetation was located on the railroad's property, and, further, it was undisputed that the survivor failed to show that the vegetation was planted or maintained in violation of any statute, code, or local ordinance. Furthermore, although railroads could be liable under common law negligence principles, the failure to maintain a railroad right of way was addressed by the Georgia Code of Public Transportation, specifically by O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51. Town of Register v. Fortner, 262 Ga. App. 507, 586 S.E.2d 54 (2003).

Genuine issue of material fact existed about whether there was an absence of governmental authorization for vegetation that allegedly obscured the decedent's view as the decedent drove a tractor-trailer across the town's railroad crossing and was struck by the railway's train and that issue precluded the appellate court's ruling that reversed the trial court's summary judgment to the town and the railway. Fortner v. Town of Register, 278 Ga. 625, 604 S.E.2d 175 (2004).

Town was not entitled to summary judgment on a decedent's nuisance claim as correspondence between the town and the railway indicated that in the months preceding a train-truck accident, the defendants were aware that the overgrown shrubbery needed to be cut back to prevent interference with the line of sight at a railroad crossing; further, photographs were also submitted from which a jury might conclude that the shrubs obscured visibility. Town of Register v. Fortner, 274 Ga. App. 586, 618 S.E.2d 26 (2005).

Cited in Zumbado v. Lincoln Property Co., 209 Ga. App. 163, 433 S.E.2d 301 (1993); Murray v. Ga. DOT, 284 Ga. App. 263, 644 S.E.2d 290 (2007);.

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Municipal control of traffic

- Traffic on city streets which is not part of the State Highway System is under municipal control. 1977 Op. Att'y Gen. No. U77-45.

- An offense under O.C.G.A. § 32-6-51 is not one for which those charged with a violation are to be fingerprinted. 2007 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 2007-1.