Interested in any comments as they pertain to a local gov't requiring a developer to provide public access to a shoreline owned by the public as part of a platting process. More specifically, if a developer owns land adjoining a shoreline that is publically owned, he/she submitts a preliminary plat, is it out of line for a local govt to require as part of that process that the developer either dedicate an area for public access, or identify on the final plat the area as an "easement for future access purposes". With this said, it is understandable that this type of requirement may vary from state to state but was curious about folks perspectives concerning the the legality such practices.
-
We're a fun, friendly, and diverse group of planners, placemakers, built environment shapers, students, and other folks who found their people here. Create your FREE Cyburbia ID, and join us today! Register through your Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter, or Microsoft account, or use your email address.
Public access to shorelines
- Thread starter mugbub
- Start date
Chet
Cyburbian Emeritus
- Messages
- 10,624
- Points
- 33
It's law in Wisconsin - our state's constitution has a "public trust doctrine" which indicates in part that all navigiable waterways belong to the People of the state. Developers are required to dedicate at least 60' of frontage at intervals of no less than one half mile. The Statute is 236.16(3). Annotated statutes can be viewed by acessing www.wisconsin.gov
Jerry Weitz
Cyburbian
- Messages
- 77
- Points
- 4
One must start with principles in supreme court takings cases like Nollan. But I agree that many places generally can negotatiate or exact public access reservations. It is routine to get shoreline access in Washington by local governments because of its Shoreline Management Act, as a condition of issuing permits, but because that is a stated objective of the act. I'm sure other places exact public access rights in other states, too, despite the inherent legal risks.