- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Any successful cases against the Fed or State government over property with wetlands??
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:42 pm
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:42 pm
I’ve researched online unsuccessfully but am curious if anyone has seen a case successfully brought against a local, state, or federal government for the following:
I own a house that has a portion of wetlands on it. Had a pool built in the fenced in area where the yard existed and had a permit for it. Now county is stating part of my decking and fill dirt is sitting in a 25 foot buffer zone and are apparently trying to figure out how bad they want to screw me.
With this said, if I can’t touch or have anything in the buffer or wetlands, then I really don’t own it. I’d like to challenge in court to force the government to purchase the land that I can’t touch at fair market value which would be a pretty nice amount.
I’m curious if anyone has seen a similar type case where someone has fought over owned land they couldn’t touch and forced the government to purchase said land? I’m curious if any of these rules / restrictions could be traced to unlawful bureaucratic agency’s?
Sorry for long post, but everything I’m finding online is about eminent domain cases.
I own a house that has a portion of wetlands on it. Had a pool built in the fenced in area where the yard existed and had a permit for it. Now county is stating part of my decking and fill dirt is sitting in a 25 foot buffer zone and are apparently trying to figure out how bad they want to screw me.
With this said, if I can’t touch or have anything in the buffer or wetlands, then I really don’t own it. I’d like to challenge in court to force the government to purchase the land that I can’t touch at fair market value which would be a pretty nice amount.
I’m curious if anyone has seen a similar type case where someone has fought over owned land they couldn’t touch and forced the government to purchase said land? I’m curious if any of these rules / restrictions could be traced to unlawful bureaucratic agency’s?
Sorry for long post, but everything I’m finding online is about eminent domain cases.
21
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:49 pm to FlaTiger25
If you got a buddy in government, you’re good. If you don’t, you’re not.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:54 pm to Meauxjeaux
Yep, I agree with you and am on the screwed side.
My thought is that regardless, I think it’s ridiculous and know it would be a long shot, but I’m stubborn enough to at least bring suit if there was an angle to try an play regarding these rules and regulations being overreach or unlawful if done by an agency that doesn’t have the right to create a law.
My thought is that regardless, I think it’s ridiculous and know it would be a long shot, but I’m stubborn enough to at least bring suit if there was an angle to try an play regarding these rules and regulations being overreach or unlawful if done by an agency that doesn’t have the right to create a law.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:55 pm to FlaTiger25
Does this property have a historic parking lot?
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:57 pm to FlaTiger25
quote:
I own a house that has a portion of wetlands on it
I doubt it.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:57 pm to FlaTiger25
Does Sakett vs. EPA apply to you?
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:58 pm to FlaTiger25
Find a lawyer if you want an answer.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 10:59 pm to FlaTiger25
I know a guy in leeville who got in trouble for trying to drop dirt to regain land that had turned into marsh. None of it makes sense.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:10 pm to LemmyLives
quote:
Does Sakett vs. EPA apply to you?
This case is interesting and exactly why I started this thread. Thank you.
Just trying to see if anyone has seen a similar scenario brought to court and try to determine if it’s something I could even find a reputable firm to discuss with me. Thanks again for sharing the above case.
This post was edited on 7/22/24 at 11:15 pm
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:11 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
Does this property have a historic parking lot?
Doubtful
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:17 pm to FlaTiger25
Is it an isolated wetland or does it have a nexis to waters of the US? (Is ir connected to a river, creek or lake?)
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:45 pm to FlaTiger25
Lopes, the 1st Circuit case that was upheld by the USSC and overturned Chevron, was about regulatory overreach in a fishery.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:48 pm to Lonnie Utah
@lonnie Utah,
In regards to your question, I’m a couple of feet into a 25 foot buffer zone, I found this rule from the county that I believe they are using:
Restrictions such as stormwater and a 25’ wetland buffer may apply to this location.
Additionally, the site appears to lie entirely within a Coastal Dune Lakes Tributary Buffer. Sites
within this buffer zone have specific restrictions to development and preservation requirements.
Restrictions pertaining to Coastal Dune Lakes Tributary Buffers can be found in the Walton
County Land Development Code 4.02.03.
Not sure how the hell they are stating I’m in a coastal dune lake as I’m 5 miles from the beach and property butts up against a wooded area (wetlands) that sits on the choctahatchee bay.
In regards to your question, I’m a couple of feet into a 25 foot buffer zone, I found this rule from the county that I believe they are using:
Restrictions such as stormwater and a 25’ wetland buffer may apply to this location.
Additionally, the site appears to lie entirely within a Coastal Dune Lakes Tributary Buffer. Sites
within this buffer zone have specific restrictions to development and preservation requirements.
Restrictions pertaining to Coastal Dune Lakes Tributary Buffers can be found in the Walton
County Land Development Code 4.02.03.
Not sure how the hell they are stating I’m in a coastal dune lake as I’m 5 miles from the beach and property butts up against a wooded area (wetlands) that sits on the choctahatchee bay.
Posted on 7/22/24 at 11:49 pm to FlaTiger25
quote:
force the government to purchase the land that I can’t touch at fair market value which would be a pretty nice amount.
quote:
fair market value
quote:
pretty nice amount
quote:
wetlands
I bought wetlands this past year at under 1000 per acre.
The restrictions greatly secrease the value.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 12:36 am to X123F45
quote:
The restrictions greatly secrease the value.
This
Wetlands are almost worthless because of the restrictions
Posted on 7/23/24 at 1:09 am to LSUFanHouston
Ha, you just need to know and pay the right people. They are stacking neighborhoods, strip malls, and everything else they can on wetlands all over St. Tammany and Tangi parish just as fast as they can build them.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 4:04 am to FlaTiger25
You need to hire an environmental engineer to challenge the wetland or floodplain map. Note that you’ll be dealing with the Army Corps of Engineer and / or FEMA so don’t expect anything to happen quickly, but these maps are being challenged so regularly that if you find an environmental engineer who has a good relationship with the local Corps office, you can sometimes get the Corps to just agree with the determination without even visiting the site.
I thought your idea about suing the government to buy the wetland is a hilariously awesome idea. I’ve never thought of that once, and it has less than a 0% chance of happening, but I love the idea. In reality, like any sort of buffer or setback, the government or municipality seemingly taking or eliminating the developable rights of your property absolutely never compensates you for it. It’s bullshite, but it never happens.
I thought your idea about suing the government to buy the wetland is a hilariously awesome idea. I’ve never thought of that once, and it has less than a 0% chance of happening, but I love the idea. In reality, like any sort of buffer or setback, the government or municipality seemingly taking or eliminating the developable rights of your property absolutely never compensates you for it. It’s bullshite, but it never happens.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 4:08 am to FlaTiger25
quote:
Not sure how the hell they are stating I’m in a coastal dune lake as I’m 5 miles from the beach and property butts up against a wooded area (wetlands) that sits on the choctahatchee bay.
I’m a little bit jealous tbh. Pics of pool area?
Posted on 7/23/24 at 4:39 am to FlaTiger25
I know a guy that bought properties all around and every time he’d encroach on neighbors, cutting down their trees, screw up their yards, drainage, etc. Well, he finally pushed some dirt in a man made lake and mouthed off when questioned by the HOA. HOA rep was a judge of some sort, and the fallout was the equivalent of the hand of God reaching down from the sky and ruining this guys life, all in the name of wetlands. If I were you I’d just go ahead and get a lawyer, talk to your state\fed rep, and start figuring out how you move forward. Sometimes you can create a wetland of equal value of what you allegedly took away. Any signs of fighting will be met with the equivalent of that cop shooting the hot water lady in the face.
Posted on 7/23/24 at 7:15 am to FlaTiger25
quote:
Walton County Land Development Code 4.02.03.
Walton County is the worst in terms of overreach. God Speed
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News