Submitted by Guestroad (not verified) on Fri, 09/28/2012 - 11:18pm.
Uhhh, the reporter got it the facts wrong.
Oleander is a STATE ROAD, not a City Street. If you don't know the difference get some education.
Did the reporter try to get the facts from more than one side of the owner of Flips? Probably not.
So, it's possible that DOT comes to the owner, and asks to buy some more of the right of way. This is happened to me, by the way (, although not along Oleander.) I take the offer and get paid. I decide I want to move my sign off the land I just sold. Now the cities rules about sign size have been there for a while, the other signs in the area are are oversize, but the city didn't say they had to come down - the grandfather clause - but let the sign be moved, and it must match the laws.
It almost sounds to me like the owner of Flips WANTS special treatment - literally wants his cake and to get to eat it too.
And addtionally, sounds like the reporting is sloppy around here.
Flips
Uhhh, the reporter got it the facts wrong.
Oleander is a STATE ROAD, not a City Street. If you don't know the difference get some education.
Did the reporter try to get the facts from more than one side of the owner of Flips? Probably not.
So, it's possible that DOT comes to the owner, and asks to buy some more of the right of way. This is happened to me, by the way (, although not along Oleander.) I take the offer and get paid. I decide I want to move my sign off the land I just sold. Now the cities rules about sign size have been there for a while, the other signs in the area are are oversize, but the city didn't say they had to come down - the grandfather clause - but let the sign be moved, and it must match the laws.
It almost sounds to me like the owner of Flips WANTS special treatment - literally wants his cake and to get to eat it too.
And addtionally, sounds like the reporting is sloppy around here.