– Riparian rights include the rights to an unobstructed view of the water.
– An upland owner has the right to an unobstructed view of the channel.
– To be a legitimate claim of obstructing a waterfront view, the obstruction must substantially and materially block the land owner’s view of the channel. 1. In Mickel v. Norton, the Sunrise Waterway was found not to qualify as an adjoining water view to the bay and river, as it was manmade for access and not considered part of the adjoining waters of the lot.
2. In Lee County v. Kiesel, a bridge built by the county over the Caloosahatchee River was found to obstruct the owners’ riparian right of view, leading to a substantial loss in property value.
3. The court acknowledged that there is no specific rule for defining the physical parameters of the riparian right of view, as shorelines and property lines do not always neatly parallel channels or each other. 1. The proposed fill in the channel in Hayes v. Bowman did not encroach upon the plaintiffs’ riparian rights.
2. The view of the Stetson Law School was not considered a special riparian right in Hayes v. Bowman.
3. The plaintiffs in Brannon v. Boldt were given an easement by implication to reach the water in a convenient manner.
4. The easement created in Brannon v. Boldt conveyed riparian rights associated with the lands, including a clear and unobstructed view over the waters. – In Mildenberger v. U.S., the court found that waterfront owners do not have a compensable property interest in riparian rights to view aesthetically pleasing water.
– In Freed v. Miami Beach Pier Corporation, the court held that riparian owners are not entitled to enjoin authorized construction of a pier if it does not materially impede access, even if it obstructs the view of the adjoining owner.
– Other cases that confirm the riparian owner’s right to an unobstructed view over the waters include Thiesen v. Gulf, F. & A. Ry. Co., Walton County v. Stop Beach Renourishment, Inc., Board of Trustees of Internal Imp. Trust Fund v. Medeira Beach Nominee, Inc., Burkart v. City of Fort Lauderdale, Tampa Southern R. Co. v. Nettles, and Board of Trustees of the Internal Imp. Trust Fund v. Sand Key Assoc., Ltd. 1. Florida law recognizes disputes and litigation among waterfront property owners and the state regarding the use of shorelines and waterways.
2. Riparian rights ensure fair and equitable treatment of property owners in regards to their ownership of waterfront property, including the right to an unobstructed view of the water.
3. The goal of riparian rights is to promote a policy of “reasonable use” of shared shorelines and waterways among private property owners.
https://www.jimersonfirm.com/blog/2015/09/riparian-rights-in-florida-the-right-to-a-waterfront-view/
Leave a Reply