CopyCited 27 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2008 WL 4381126
...Dep't of Transp.,
476 So.2d 649 (Fla.1985) as controlling). Thus, the First District held that the final order issued pursuant to the Act results in an unconstitutional taking of the littoral rights to accretion and to contact with water without an eminent domain proceeding as required by section
161.141, Florida Statutes....
...ches which are critically eroded and in need of restoration and *1108 nourishment" [7] and to "authorize appropriations to pay up to 75 percent of the actual costs for restoring and renourishing a critically eroded beach." §
161.101(1). Pursuant to section
161.141, when a local government applies for funding for beach restoration, a survey of the shoreline is conducted to determine the MHWL for the area....
...Once established, any additions to the upland property landward of the MHWL that result from the restoration project remain the property of the upland owner subject to all governmental regulations, including a public easement for traditional uses of the beach. § 161.141....
...the upland owners' littoral rights, including, but not limited to, rights of ingress, egress, view, boating, bathing, and fishing, and prevents the State from erecting structures on the beach seaward of the ECL except as required to prevent erosion. Section 161.141 further declares that the State has no intention "to extend its claims to lands not already held by it or to deprive any upland or submerged land owner of the legitimate and constitutional use and enjoyment of his or her property." Moreover, section 161.141 explains that "[i]f an authorized beach restoration, beach nourishment, and erosion control project cannot reasonably be accomplished without the taking of private property, the taking must be made by the requesting authority by emine...
...ry and suspend the operation of the common law rule of accretion but preserve the littoral rights of access, view, and use after an ECL is recorded, facially unconstitutional; (2) then, because eminent domain proceedings did not occur as required by section 161.141, it found that the Act was unconstitutionally applied by the Department in this case; and (3) because littoral rights *1116 were unconstitutionally taken, it found that property rights had been unreasonably infringed, making it necess...
...See §
161.201. The Act also provides that the State has no intention "to extend its claims to lands not already held by it or to deprive any upland or submerged land owner of the legitimate and constitutional use and enjoyment of his or her property." §
161.141....
...Thus, our holding that was limited to the context of condemnation of upland property is inapplicable. Furthermore, in contrast to the circumstances of Belvedere, upland owners under the Act continue to have the ability to exercise their littoral rights to access, use, and view. See §§
161.201;
161.141....
...w-water mark, while, in contrast, the littoral-upland holder's ownership continues until, and includes, the MHWL. See, e.g., White v. Hughes,
139 Fla. 54,
190 So. 446, 449 (1939); see also art. X, § 11, Fla. Const; §
253.141(1), Fla. Stat. (2005); §
161.141, Fla....
...[2] For ease of reading, we refer generally to the statutory provisions at issue as "the Beach and Shore Preservation Act" or the "Act." However, this case only concerns the following provisions of part I of chapter 161, Florida Statutes (2005): sections
161.088,
161.101,
161.141,
161.161,
161.191,
161.201, and
161.211....
...lantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the bays, lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof." Specifically, section
161.151, Florida Statutes (2005), defines an ECL, or "erosion control line," as the line determined in accordance with the provisions of ss.
161.141-161.211 which represents the landward extent of the claims of the state in its capacity as sovereign titleholder of the submerged bottoms and shores of the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the bays, lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof on the date of the recording of the survey as authorized in s....
...Further, despite the majority's efforts to marginalize this right, contact with the water demands protection under Florida law because it is part of our system of private-property ownership. [25] See Save Our Beaches, 31 Fla. L. Weekly at D1173, ___ So.2d at ___. [26] §
161.151(3), Fla. Stat. (2005); see also §
161.141, Fla. Stat. (2005). [27] See §§
161.141,
161.191,
161.201, Fla....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...n program, recognizing specifically that "proper nourishment and restoration of badly eroded beaches requires the financial support of both the State and Federal governments." Ch. 70-276, Laws of Fla. (preamble). In particular it adopted what became section 161.141(1), which included the following statement of general intent: "Declaration of public policy....
...for publicly financed beach nourishment and restoration programs and establish and clarify the property rights of the State and private upland owners arising from or created by such programs." The scheme adopted in what became designated as sections
161.141 to
161.211 then proceeded to set the ground rules for state funding of local beach nourishment and restoration projects....
...After some technical changes to chapter 161 over the period between 1970 and 1985, the legislature added significant new features to the statutory scheme in 1986. The impetus for the additions was a report submitted by DNR in April 1986. We first note a pertinent change in the deletion of the statement of general intent from section 161.141(1) quoted above....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19391
...Annapolis Waterfront Co., 284 Md. 383, 396 A.2d 1080 (1979). [12] "The `high energy beach' is a shore fronting the open ocean and dominated by sand and dunal features." Maloney and O'Donnell, Drawing the Line at the Oceanfront, 30 Fla.L. Rev. 383, 385 n. 19 (1978). [13] Section 161.141, Florida Statutes (1979) also makes a finding: Beach erosion being a serious menace to the economy and general welfare of the people of this state and having advanced to emergency proportions, it is hereby declared to be in the public...
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2006 WL 1112700
...The ALJ noted that the right to accretion is a riparian right, but ruled that, under the pertinent statutes, the riparian right to accretions (as well as the risk of erosion) will be eliminated upon recording of the erosion control line required by statute. Section 161.141 provides: The Legislature declares that it is the public policy of the state to cause to be fixed and determined, pursuant to beach restoration, beach nourishment, and erosion control projects, the boundary line between sovereignty la...
...property. If an authorized beach restoration, beach nourishment, and erosion control project cannot reasonably be accomplished without the taking of private property, the taking must be made by the requesting authority by eminent domain proceedings. § 161.141, Fla....
...ine if it had been located directly on the line of mean high water on the date the board of trustees' survey was recorded. (2) Once the erosion control line along any segment of the shoreline has been established in accordance with the provision of ss. 161.141-161.211, the common law shall no longer operate to increase or decrease the proportions of any upland property lying landward of such line, either by accretion or erosion or by any other natural or artificial process, except as provided in s....
...Notwithstanding the recognition that the upland landowners' titles have been altered by operation of statute, section
161.201 states that the landowners continue to be entitled to all of their riparian rights: Any upland owner or lessee who by operation of ss.
161.141-161.211 ceases to be holder of title to the mean high-water line shall, nonetheless, continue to be entitled to all common-law riparian rights except as otherwise provided in s....
...161.191(2), including but not limited to rights of ingress, egress, view, boating, bathing, and fishing. In addition the state shall not allow any structure to be erected upon lands created, either naturally or artificially, seaward of any erosion control line fixed in accordance with the provisions of ss. 161.141-161.211, except such structures required for the prevention or erosion....
...ions to the property, and (ii) have the property's contact with the water remain intact, were eliminated by the Department's final order. Because their riparian rights were unconstitutionally taken without an eminent domain proceeding as required by section 161.141, those rights have been infringed upon....
...Conclusion Accordingly, we reverse the Department's final order approving the Joint Coastal Permit and Authorization to Use Sovereign Submerged Lands. We remand for the Department to provide satisfactory evidence of sufficient upland interest pursuant to Florida Administrative Code Rule 18-21.004(3)(b). As provided by section 161.141, Florida Statutes (2005), if the project "cannot reasonably be accomplished without the taking of private property, the taking must be made by the requesting authority by eminent domain proceedings." [7] To the extent that the Board o...
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2013 WL 5302580, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 15067
...In the complaint, the plaintiffs challenged the Act “because it confiscates constitutionally protected littoral property rights without providing due process of law or just and full compensation.” Specifically, plaintiffs sought a declaration that sections
161.141 and
161.191, Florida Statutes (2004), are unconstitutional, and requested the trial court to enjoin the establishment of the erosion control line pri- or to eminent domain proceedings being instituted by the defendants to acquire “the protected littoral rights” of the plaintiffs....
...Flamingo Investment Properties, LLC, Patrick Ross, and Dennis Jones, along with appellees Alford and Lindsey. On March 7, 2005, in accordance with the trial court’s order, the plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint, alleging that sections
161.141,
161.191, and
161.161, Florida Statutes (2004), are unconstitutional, both facially and as applied....
