The Subdivision of Land Part 3. 2 Conforming the Plat Map The plat map must conform to the Official MapThe plat map must conform to the Official Map So,

The Subdivision of LandThe Subdivision of Land

Part 3Part 3Part 3Part 3

2

Conforming the Plat MapConforming the Plat Map

• The plat map must conform to the Official The plat map must conform to the Official MapMap

• So, where the Official Map shows roads or So, where the Official Map shows roads or canals, the plat map must also show roads canals, the plat map must also show roads or canals, or canals,

with nothing encroaching on themwith nothing encroaching on them

3

4

5

• This plat map shows the development This plat map shows the development going to the rights of way for the abutting going to the rights of way for the abutting significant featuressignificant features– US 41 – the Tamiami TrailUS 41 – the Tamiami Trail– Krome AvenueKrome Avenue– The C-4 CanalThe C-4 Canal

• Note that there is no encroachment.Note that there is no encroachment.

6

Here is a reservationHere is a reservation

7

Palm Beach County v. WrightPalm Beach County v. Wright, , 641 So.2d 50 (Fla 1994)641 So.2d 50 (Fla 1994)

• A “reservation”A “reservation”– Sort of like reserving a table at a restaurant.Sort of like reserving a table at a restaurant.– Palm Beach County reserved certain Palm Beach County reserved certain

properties for future roadways and nobody properties for future roadways and nobody could use that property for anything that could use that property for anything that would impede that future use.would impede that future use.

• Hey, we’re gonna build a road there!Hey, we’re gonna build a road there!

Existing Road – Southern Blvd

Reserved for future expansion of Southern Blvd

8

9

This is the right of way This is the right of way that was reservedthat was reserved

10

11

• Well, wouldn’t a “reservation” be a taking Well, wouldn’t a “reservation” be a taking because the owner couldn’t use the land?because the owner couldn’t use the land?

• That’s what That’s what Joint VenturesJoint Ventures was about. was about.– ““Maps of reservation” were invalid because of Maps of reservation” were invalid because of

a violation of due process – a violation of due process – • No hearingsNo hearings• No opportunity to present evidenceNo opportunity to present evidence• Etc.Etc.

12

Joint Ventures v Dept of Transportation, Joint Ventures v Dept of Transportation,

641 So.2d 50 (Fla. 1994)641 So.2d 50 (Fla. 1994) • The Florida Department of Transportation The Florida Department of Transportation

planned for the expansion of state roads in planned for the expansion of state roads in Hillsborough County.Hillsborough County.

• These plans included rights of way These plans included rights of way acquisitionsacquisitions

• The DOT then filed “rights of way The DOT then filed “rights of way reservations” meaning, among other reservations” meaning, among other things, that property owners could not things, that property owners could not encroach on these rights of way encroach on these rights of way (reservations).(reservations).

13

• At issue in At issue in Joint Ventures Joint Ventures was a was a prohibition on “development” – read as prohibition on “development” – read as plat or site plan approval – if that plat or plat or site plan approval – if that plat or plan encroached on a reserved right of plan encroached on a reserved right of way.way.

• From the property owner’s perspective, From the property owner’s perspective, this is a denial of use – all use – and this is a denial of use – all use – and therefore a regulatory taking or inverse therefore a regulatory taking or inverse condemnation.condemnation.

• In In Joint VenturesJoint Ventures the Supreme Court the Supreme Court found that practice illegal.found that practice illegal.

14

• Would not Palm Beach County’s Would not Palm Beach County’s “thoroughfare plan” be the same thing?“thoroughfare plan” be the same thing?– Any plat or site plan had to confirm to the Any plat or site plan had to confirm to the

thoroughfare plan andthoroughfare plan and– Could not encroach on a “thoroughfare.”Could not encroach on a “thoroughfare.”

15

What is a “thoroughfare map?”What is a “thoroughfare map?”

• 163.3177(6)(b) . . . A Comprehensive Plan must 163.3177(6)(b) . . . A Comprehensive Plan must have a traffic circulation element consisting of have a traffic circulation element consisting of

• the types, locations, and extent of existing and the types, locations, and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares . . .. proposed major thoroughfares . . ..

• Transportation corridors . . . may be designated in Transportation corridors . . . may be designated in the traffic circulation element . . .. the traffic circulation element . . ..

• If the transportation corridors are designated, If the transportation corridors are designated,

the local government may adopt a transportation the local government may adopt a transportation corridor management ordinance. corridor management ordinance.

[which is what Palm Beach County did][which is what Palm Beach County did]

16

Palm Beach County’sThoroughfare Map

17

• The claim in The claim in Joint VenturesJoint Ventures and and WrightWright is is that net effect of a “reservation” or a that net effect of a “reservation” or a “thoroughfare map” was to prohibit “thoroughfare map” was to prohibit development of land designated for future development of land designated for future roadway improvements.roadway improvements.

• Such prohibition would thus be a Such prohibition would thus be a per seper se taking.taking. – i.e.,i.e., the private property would be taken with the private property would be taken with

the filing of either, so it was just a matter of the filing of either, so it was just a matter of filing a claim in order to be compensated.filing a claim in order to be compensated.

18

Opinion . . .Opinion . . .

• By GrimesBy Grimes

• ““[W]e hold that the adoption of a [W]e hold that the adoption of a thoroughfare map is the proper subject thoroughfare map is the proper subject of the county’s police power which of the county’s police power which substantially advances a legitimate state substantially advances a legitimate state interest.interest.

• In fact, the county’s ability to plan for In fact, the county’s ability to plan for future growth would be seriously future growth would be seriously impeded without the thoroughfare map.”impeded without the thoroughfare map.”

19

Does this mean . . .Does this mean . . .• . . . that Wight’s property was not taken?. . . that Wight’s property was not taken?

• No!No!– Wight’s facial attack failed.Wight’s facial attack failed.– The simple act of including a thoroughfare The simple act of including a thoroughfare

map in a comprehensive plan did not map in a comprehensive plan did not constitute a taking of private properties constitute a taking of private properties located within the designated corridors.located within the designated corridors.

– Wright would have to Wright would have to • apply for development, apply for development, • be denied, and be denied, and • then attack the regulations as applied. then attack the regulations as applied.

20

• But what if Wright was approved with a But what if Wright was approved with a condition of non-encroachment?condition of non-encroachment?

• Could this be a denial of a beneficial use?Could this be a denial of a beneficial use?

–Denominator IssueDenominator Issue

21