Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No it's not - as long as they are justly compensated.
I don't think it even has to be justly. We had a huge area of land (public) that ended up being surrounded by private land. The owner was "forced" to leave access open on a trail to the area everyone wanted to visit. He made a huge stink about what he got compensated.
I have a place near the beach. They made the boardwalk Public, the bathrooms/showers are before you enter beach are public. From high tide line to boardwalk is town property. Nothing is built on it. The public can use bathroom, walk on boardwalk, and can use beach from high tide down to water even if you dont live in town. But they cannot use the beach. Also they have to take a boat if they want to get to below high tide line as they cant cross the beach.
technically the beach is semi public as everyone in town can use it. the beach is free Also town can access state and FEMA funds to rebuild board walk and bathrooms and showers as they are truly public, anyone in world can use them.
The only beef I have with my town is the resident only rule for beach is annoying. They dont charge and cant buy passes and are picture ID. So I cant vrbo, airbnb, let a relative use my place as they cant get on beach. It is only for owner or full time year round tenant. But I guess that is why beach is nice.
Some folks from other countries or even states are actually shocked when the hear of beaches like this with locked gates for residents only as the concept of private beaches or even beaches that charge is a foreign concept
I have a place near the beach. They made the boardwalk Public, the bathrooms/showers are before you enter beach are public. From high tide line to boardwalk is town property. Nothing is built on it. The public can use bathroom, walk on boardwalk, and can use beach from high tide down to water. But they cannot use the [dry sand] beach.
Most ocean states are the same. The onus is on the local, state, or federal government to acquire and therefore provide publicly owned land for public access to the public portion of the beach (and accept any corresponding legal liability) which as you mentioned is usually from high tide down to water. It is NOT private property owners' responsibility to permit public access across their privately owned property to access the publicly owned portion of the beach.
Would it be wrong to assume that property owners along a beach with restricted access to the public have higher property values than those that allow public access, and, due to that, are paying much more in property taxes, therefore subsidizing the public beach access elsewhere?
It would seem to me that allowing some private beaches to exist would be more lucrative for the immediate jurisdiction, providing funding for more than just the public beaches.
OTOH, those that can afford the "private" beaches should not have their insurance subsidized at the same time. Those that want luxury and can afford it should pay for it.
Because they have never owned the beaches. When they bought the property it was specifically known they did not own the beaches.
Yes and no. In many states, private property owners own the dry sand beach up to the mean high water mark line (usually determined by high tide average over a number of years).
Would it be wrong to assume that property owners along a beach with restricted access to the public have higher property values than those that allow public access, and, due to that, are paying much more in property taxes, therefore subsidizing the public beach access elsewhere?
Your assumption is correct.
Quote:
OTOH, those that can afford the "private" beaches should not have their insurance subsidized at the same time. Those that want luxury and can afford it should pay for it.
It's not as subsidized as many believe. Flood insurance rates change according to a property's FEMA flood zone classification, and those in the most likely to flood zones pay a lot more for their flood insurance than others in less likely to flood zones. In direct contrast, property owners in tornado alley have cheap insurance but still collect when a tornado strikes.
Yes and no. In many states, private property owners own the dry sand beach up to the mean high water mark line (usually determined by high tide average over a number of years).
Shrug, then thats the limit of their ownership. However in the majority of states the beaches are a public owned feature. A lot of people here seem to believe that we should give that to these folks because they somehow suddenly deserve it.
The law is setup this way for a reason, and theres no reason that I can see to change it.
Shrug, then thats the limit of their ownership. However in the majority of states the beaches are a public owned feature.
Incorrect. In a majority of states, the publicly owned beach is only the wet sand beach. That is, only the area of the beach seaward of the mean high water mark line. Potentially, that means there is no non-submerged public beach at high tide.
The dry sand beach is private property in all but only Oregon, Texas, and NJ as far as I know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.