CopyCited 65 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 16 ERC 1766, 11 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20992, 16 ERC (BNA) 1766, 1981 Fla. LEXIS 2652
...In further support of its finding that denial of Estuary's permit violated chapter *1380 380, the district court found that the adjudicatory commission did not indicate any changes in the development which would make it possible for Estuary to receive the permit, as required by section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes (1973)....
...Appellants argue that denial of the appeal effectively reinstated the order of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) which contains twelve specific changes which Estuary must incorporate in its proposal in order to make it eligible to receive a permit. However, section 380.08(3) states that if any government agency denies a development permit it shall specify its reasons in writing and indicate any changes in the development proposal that would make it eligible to receive a permit....
...ue and indefinite that it [is] doubtful that Estuary could ascertain what it would be required to do to obtain approval."
381 So.2d at 1132. This language does not indicate an intention to adopt the planning council's changes in order to comply with section
380.08(3)....
...ds that the agency's exercise of discretion violated a constitutional or statutory provision. We disagree with the district court's conclusion that the facts as found by the agency [10] constituted a taking and therefore violated the constitution or section 380.08, Florida Statutes....
...ment would in fact be detrimental to the surrounding area. This case is remanded to the district court of appeal with instructions to remand it to the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission with instructions to that commission to comply with section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes (1973), as set forth in this opinion....
CopyCited 19 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 8 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20
...The Act preserves "all the existing rights of private property ... in accord with the constitutions of this state and of the United States," Section
380.021, and prohibits a rule or order which is "unduly restrictive or constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation." Section
380.08(1)....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...due process. *1137 C. The Adjudicatory Commission violated Ch. 380, Fla. Stat. (1977) by failing to indicate any changes in the development proposal that would make it eligible to receive the permit, thereby reaching an unduly restrictive result. F.S. 380.08, provides in part that: "(1) Nothing in this chapter authorizes any governmental agency to adopt a rule or regulation or issue any order that is unduly restrictive or constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation...
...Although it is clear that Petitioner has been denied relief it is left to wonder what changes may be made to render its proposal eligible. The only condition which is crystal clear from the order is that the mangroves must be preserved. The order does not comply with F.S. 380.08(3)....
...Lee County have taken that property for a public purpose without payment of full compensation in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 9 and Article X, Section 6 of the Florida Constitution, and Section 380.08(1) Fla. Stat. (1977). A. The orders of Lee County and the Adjudicatory Commission deny petitioner the right to make any economically *1138 beneficial use of its property in violation of the United States and Florida Constitutions, and Section 380.08(1), Fla....
...but also "* * * the right to acquire, use and dispose of it for lawful purposes * * *." ( Kass v. Lewin,
104 So.2d 572, 578 (Fla. 1958)) The constitutionally protected right to make economically beneficial use of private property is recognized by F.S.
380.08(1), hereinabove quoted....
...rty owner is compensated. We therefore conclude that denial of the requested development permit cannot be sustained absent payment of full compensation to petitioner for the taking of the mangrove acreage lying below the salina, as contemplated by F.S. 380.08(1)....
...s vested development rights conferred by a valid and binding settlement agreement between the State and Petitioner's predecessor in title, and the denial of such rights violates the United States and Florida Constitutions and Sections
380.06(12) and
380.08(1) Fla....
...[5] Although preservation of the mangroves was obviously uppermost in the minds of all Respondents, considering the application, neither the Council, Lee County, the Hearing Officer nor the Adjudicatory Commission ever unequivocally so stated. Had they done so the provisions of F.S. 380.08(1) would have been activated and this entire proceeding would have become needless....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 289, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 402, 1988 WL 6398
...om the department ..., upon certification by [DOT] that it will meet all requirements imposed by statute, rule, or standard for environmental control and protection as such statute, rule, or standard applies to a governmental program." Additionally, Section 380.08(1), Florida Statutes, explicitly provides that no government agency may adopt a rule or regulation "that is unduly restrictive or constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation, in violation of the constitutions of this state, or the United States." In order to protect a property owner from a noncompensated taking caused by denial of a development permit, Section 380.085, Florida Statutes, provides specific judicial remedies: If the owner desires to contest the denial of same, the owner may seek review of such administrative decision in circuit court for the purpose of determining whether the agency a...
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...d as having a regional impact ("DRI"). The statute provides that the Commission shall, after a hearing, issue a decision either granting or denying permission to develop and that the Commission may attach conditions and restrictions to its decision. Section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes requires that a governmental agency denying a development permit specify its reasons in writing and state the changes, if any, that would make the proposed development eligible to receive the permit. Under Section 380.08(1), Florida Statutes, the governmental agency may not issue an order that is unduly restrictive or that constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation....
...side. The Commission considered the recommended order and remanded the case to the hearing officer for further hearings to determine what changes in the development proposal would make the proposal eligible to receive the permit, in conformance with Section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes....
...(emphasis added) Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the hearing officer recommended that the Fox development, as originally proposed, be allowed and that the development order of the County be affirmed. The Recommended Order indicates that the hearing officer interpreted Section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes, to require that changes specified under the statute leave essentially intact the development as originally proposed....
...development to the conditions prescribed by the Commission, (2) present to Palm Beach County an alternate development proposal within the guidelines given him by the Commission, (3) seek review in circuit court of the Commission's order, pursuant to Section 380.085, Florida Statutes, alleging that the Commission's action was an unreasonable exercise of the State's police power, or (4) seek review of the Commission's order, in accordance with Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of dete...
...impact of the development on the environment and natural resources of the region. Neither has there been a finding that the Commission's plan is a reasonable restriction on the developer's use of his land and not a taking of property in violation of Section 380.08(1), Florida Statutes....
...South Florida Regional Planning Council,
327 So.2d 56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied,
336 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 1976). [3] Whether less ambitious development could be undertaken on the property without damaging the wildlife habitat or the wetland values was not addressed in the initial hearing. [4] Section
380.08(3), Florida Statutes: (3) If any governmental agency denies a development permit under this chapter, it shall specify its reasons in writing and indicate any changes in the development proposal that would make it eligible to receive the permit....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...the permit unless the county instituted proceedings to condemn the property. Not surprisingly, the supreme court granted certiorari, approved the agency action, and remanded the case solely for specification by the agency of the matters required by section 380.08(3), Florida Statutes (1972)....
...supreme court. Graham v. Estuary Properties, Inc., supra . It seems to me that much of the confusion surrounding this problem has resulted from unwarranted assumptions about the meaning and purpose of language such as that found in subsection (1) of section 380.08, Florida Statutes (1972). [4] There is, of *215 course, no indication whether chapter 380 applied to the permit proceedings in the present case, but the principles embodied in section 380.08(1) surely apply to all agency action, even when not expressly legislated. That is precisely my point. The cardinal rule, whether articulated by a court, a legislature or a constitution, is that private property cannot be confiscated for public purposes with fiscal impunity. Section 380.08(1) says no more than that....
...desire by a shorter cut than the constitutional way of paying for the change. The noteworthy feature of that comment is that there is no hint that the public condition cannot be thus improved, but merely a reminder that the fiddler must be paid. [4] Section 380.08(1), Florida Statutes (1972)....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2003 WL 22900537
...perty owners' rights had not vested prior to designation of the land as an area of critical state concern). To the extent that these regulations render any of the Landowners' property practically useless, the Landowners are entitled to compensation. Section 380.08, Florida Statutes (1997), provides that the government cannot adopt a rule or regulation that constitutes a taking without providing full compensation....
...ollowing the notification or in a binding letter of interpretation. When the notification requirements have not been met, the vested rights authorized by this paragraph shall expire June 30, 1986, unless development commenced prior to that date. [5] Section 380.085, Florida Statutes (1997), enables a person substantially affected by the denial of a permit to build, to initiate an action in circuit court on the grounds that an area of critical state concern development order effects a taking with...
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 382986
...Chapter 380 specifically provides that: Nothing in this chapter authorizes any governmental agency to adopt a rule or regulation or issue any order that is unduly restrictive or constitutes a taking of property without the payment of full compensation, in violation of the constitutions of this state or of the United States. § 380.08(1), Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 13802
Landowners are entitled to compensation”); see also §
380.08, Fla. Stat. (“Nothing in this chapter authorizes
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 150347
...es that it is not a bar to the acquisition of the system by the County or any other governmental agency by lawful means. The development of The Meadows apparently proceeded without significant legal complication for the next eighteen years. Although section 380.08, Florida Statutes (1973), would have allowed Taylor Woodrow Homes to challenge any regulation or order that it regarded as unduly restrictive, there is no indication that Taylor Woodrow Homes ever attempted to disavow its obligations c...
...to waste water in the contract. It had the right to request Taylor Woodrow Homes to voluntarily transfer property within the development to the County. Whether this dedication requirement was an excessive regulation under the constitution and under section 380.08 cannot be resolved on the face of the contract....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 9077, 1991 WL 183014
...fficient to deny the change in the use of the area. As there is competent substantial evidence in the extensive record to support the findings of the hearing officer, we therefore, affirm. See Graham v. Estuary Properties,
399 So.2d 1374 (Fla.1981). Section
380.08(3), Florida Statutes (1987), 1 provides that after specifying the reasons for denying a proposed development, the agency shall indicate any changes in the development proposal that would make it eligible to receive the permit....
...There are thousands of pages of transcripts, there were over 40 experts who testified, and over 700 documents presented to the hearing officer. The hearing officer spent a great deal of time analyzing this record, and it is apparent to us that he made all the specific recommendations he could in compliance with section 380.08(3)....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21639
the FLWAC with instructions to comply with Section 380.-08(3), Florida Statutes. Graham v. Estuary Properties
