In Marina Grande North v. Fortuna Smulker et al, here's the opinion, the 3d upheld the circuit court's overturning a rezoning on the basis that the city allowed too much density by including privately owned bottom lands in the calculation when the definition of density excludes "water bodies" from the lot area for density purposes.
Seems like a simple enough interpretation question - but now, on to the litigation over the extinction of property rights in submerged, privately owned lands.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment