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.
This is nothing new. Oceanfront property is tricky. It is governed by local laws as well as the individual deeds. I own a home on oceanfront property, and I pay property taxes on land that includes part of the beach. Where I am located, you own up to the high watermark, but there are local "right of passage" laws that prohibit me from keeping anyone from planting themselves on "my beach". Not that I would do that even if these laws didn't exist.
There was a lawsuit recently in town, where another beachfront home owner said that his land had grown. His property was deeded to the point of the beach where the vegitation (beach grass) ended. Over the years, rather than erode, the beach behind his house expanded, and so did the area of beach grass. He claimed the newly formed land and was sued by the town. It went to the county supreme court who ruled in his favor. They said the property line is ambulatory.
Sometimes I go to other beaches, and I see private beach clubs fencing off areas of the beach. That would never fly in my area. So there is no universal law regarding beach property. These NC beach goers might just win.
I don't see how. The deal-breaker is that the land owner is taxed on the land the public wants to use for free. People don't camp out in each other's back yards. Ask yourself why...
Maybe I read the article too quickly? Do they actually want to build an alley, or just keep the area clear of structures as a virtual alleyway for emergency vehicles? I read it to be the latter.
The city is selling permits to drive on the privately owned property. The land owner isn't getting paid for that.
I forgot my " ". It's a virtual alley; but that is a distinction without a difference, the city will most likely ban homeowners and beach-goers alike from using it... all at homeowners expense.
Exactly.
Either it's public land, or it's not. You can't both charge that landowner for the property and perpetually tax the landowner for such and then simultaneously say the public can use the land for free.
I don't see how. The deal-breaker is that the land owner is taxed on the land the public wants to use for free. People don't camp out in each other's back yards. Ask yourself why...
I'm 1/3 mile away from public access so I rarely get people people on my beach anyway. And when I do, it is often women who want to sunbath topless away from the crowds on the public beach. I support their right to use my beach.
This battle has played out year after year along the coast. In the place where we have beach right property it gets even more complex. The area of our beach is being slowly eroded and can take vast damage in a hurricane. The problem is created by the erection of a harbor by the Corp of Engineers years ago. The way the sand flows our beach is being moved year by year to the other side of the harbor breakwater. The result has been the loss of entire properties...homes worth over a million dollars destroyed by the the erosion of the beach.
And the property on the other side of the breakwater continues to gain beach area...acres and acres. So who owns it? Well we got the mean high water thing again. So the CofE has basically destroyed one beach community to extend another. And this goes on all along the coast. Particularly the active coast.
So find a new cause. A mere easement is a fine detail of little other than local interest. And the problem is real. Beach access does provide value to a property. But an access easement between the dunes and high water? Let us hope no court is dumb enough to get into the middle of this one.
i'm 1/3 mile away from public access so i rarely get people people on my beach anyway. And when i do, it is often women who want to sunbath topless away from the crowds on the public beach. I support their right to use my beach.
Dan Rattiner is a funny guy. I read his stuff all the time. Montauk used to be an island. They have found fish and whale fossils underground on the Nappeague stretch.
My summer house is in Amagansett, btw. You must spend some time out there if you know who Rattiner is.
Ahh so you reside in the East Hampton slums? Sorry - could not resist. 40 years of doing Montauk does that to you.
My mother, the ultimate English major, consider Dan one of the rare talents in the world. She made her living editing legal documents so her mind may have been damaged, Than again she could recite vast passages from the Illiad in ancient Greek...how much more English major can you get then that?
I still consider it one of the world's great places. I gave it up when I swore my Southwest oath. But I do point out to the California beach nuts that they don't know what real surf is.. Ditch Plains beats the hell out of almost all of S. CA and you don't need a wet suit.
I have to check and see if Rattiner is out in book form. He would be worth a small purchase...
I'm 1/3 mile away from public access so I rarely get people people on my beach anyway. And when I do, it is often women who want to sunbath topless away from the crowds on the public beach. I support their right to use my beach.
I'll sunbathe topless on your beach. My "assets" are all natural.
That said, homeowners' associations have many seasonal rental properties. Most rentals don't have beach property, so those owners/landlords are profiting from their renters using someone else's privately owned and taxed land.
Of course there is. That is the right to pass and not build structure. Thats an easement.
Can they unilaterally force an easement without compensation? Of course they can. Particularly in a case where access to a public resource is in doubt.
Could they lose? Sure it could happen. Obama lost in the only District and Appeals court on the immigration Executive orders.
But basically a victory for the property owner will simply create some small monetary reward for bad civics. So you lose even if your guy wins.
Of course there is. That is the right to pass and not build structure. Thats an easement.
It's not legally recorded on the title or deed. Now what?
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.
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.
