Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist.
| Decision Date | 18 September 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-3285,97-3285 |
| Parties | 23 Fla. L. Weekly D2157 Coy A. KOONTZ, Appellant, v. ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael D. Jones and Michael L. Boswell, of Leffler & Associates, P.A., Winter Springs, for Appellant.
William H. Congdon, of St. Johns River Water Management District, Palatka, for Appellee.
Coy Koontz owns 14.9 acres in Orange County. He has owned the property, zoned commercial in front and residential in the rear, since 1971. Legislative land-use restrictions have been enacted over the years which substantially impact the property. The property is located on a tributary of the Econlockhatchee River in an area now designated by the St. Johns River Management District (St.Johns) as a part of a designated hydrologic basin and largely within the Riparian Habitat Protection Zone. Nevertheless, Koontz wanted to develop a portion of his property. He sought a management and storage of surface waters permit to dredge 3.4 acres of wetlands with an accompanying wetland resource management permit from St. Johns.
A staff person of St. Johns agreed to recommend approval if Koontz would deed the remaining portion of his property to a conservation area and do off-site mitigation by either replacing culverts on St. Johns' property four and one-half miles southeast of the Koontz property or by plugging certain canals on other property owned by St. Johns some seven miles from the Koontz property. Koontz agreed to deed his excess property into conservation status but refused the off-site mitigation demand. St. Johns rejected his application.
Koontz sued in circuit court claiming that St. Johns had no legislative authority to create the Econlockhatchee River Hydrologic Basin because the legislation relied on unconstitutionally delegated such authority. Alternatively, he sued to establish a regulatory taking. The trial court upheld the District's authority to designate the hydrological basin and determined that his regulatory taking was not ripe. We affirm the validity of the statutes 1 under the authority of St. Johns River Management District v. Consolidated-Tomoka Land Co., 717 So.2d 72 (Fla. 1st DCA July 29, 1998). See also, Askew v. Cross Key Waterways, 372 So.2d 913 (Fla.1978); We reverse the ripeness determination and remand for trial.
It is St. Johns' position that since there was a chance that a modified application might be approved, there was no final agency action. To be more precise, the District argued that since it had indicated that it would have granted the application if the owner had agreed to the off-site improvements, the owner should be required to make additional filings making other concessions until the District finally approves the permits before the owner is permitted to pursue a regulatory taking. We disagree. Koontz made a specific application to the District for permits that would permit him to develop a fraction of his property. His position, in effect, was that the application he filed and the concessions he was willing to make to the District in order for it to issue the permits (his giving up over two-thirds of his property to the District) was all that he could do and still retain an economic use of his property. The District turned him down. It made a final decision on the only application before it. One of the members of the District observed: "If they got a lawyer they ought to get him, get on with him." There is no requirement that an owner turned down in his effort to develop his property must continue to submit offers until the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Koontz
...River Water Management District (St. Johns) effected a taking of Mr. Koontz's property. See Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 720 So.2d 560, 562 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) ( Koontz I ), review denied, 729 So.2d 394 (Fla.1999). After the trial court determined that a taking had occurred,......
-
St. Johns River Water Management v. Koontz
...not appear to the court that Mr. Koontz had a "taking" claim, but that it felt bound to find one by virtue of this Court's 1998 opinion in Koontz I that a legally sufficient "taking" claim had been pled that was ripe for determination on the merits.3 The judge ultimately settled on the Noll......
-
St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Koontz, 5D02-4066.
...owners which this case demonstrates. This is the second time this dispute has been before this court. Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, 720 So.2d 560 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). In Koontz I, Koontz claimed that legislation which created the Econlackhatchee River Hydrologic Basin......
-
St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Koontz
...Palm Beach Gardens, for Appellee.TORPY, C.J.We address this case for the fifth time. See Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 720 So.2d 560 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) [Koontz I ]; St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Koontz, 861 So.2d 1267 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) ; St. Johns River Water Mgmt. ......
-
The Post-koontz Landscape: Koontz's Shortcomings and How to Move Forward
...the petitioner before the U.S. Supreme Court.57. Id. at 2591-92.58. Id. at 2592; see also Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 720 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) ("The property is located on a tributary of the Econlockhatchee River in an area now designated by the . . . ......