STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT B. KREIDER AND ROSALEA B. KREIDER D/B/A AMERICA ON THE MOVE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the State Department of Transportation's road reconstruction substantially diminished the landowners' access to their property, constituting a compensable taking under the Tessler standard.
[1] A compensable taking occurs in an inverse condemnation action when property owners suffer a substantial loss of access to their property due to government construction.
[2] The destruction of direct access to an abutting road is a trigger for analyzing whether access has been substantially diminished under the Tessler standard.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State Department of Transportation reconstructed State Road 84, elevating it and building a retaining wall that eliminated direct access and visib…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Compensable Taking cases and more on FLexlaw
GROSS, ROBERT M., Associate Judge.
The State Department of Transportation appeals from an order finding a taking in an inverse condemnation action. Because the landowners suffered a “substantial loss of access” to their property under Palm Beach County v. Tessler, 538 So. 2d 846, 849 (Fla. 1989), we affirm the trial court’s finding of a compensable taking.
This case arose out of new construction on State Road 84 in Broward County. Before construction, appellees’ property abutted State Road 84. An eastbound vehicle could access the property by making a direct right turn; westbound traffic u-turned at a median break a short distance west on State Road 84. The road reconstruction elevated State Road 84 several feet above appellees’ property. DOT built a concrete retaining wall between the eastbound lanes of State Road 84 and the property. After construction was completed, there was no direct access to the property from the eastbound side of State Road 84. Visibility of the property from State Road 84 was largely eliminated. A new one-way service road abuts the property. To reach the property from eastbound State Road 84, a motorist must now travel a circuitous route an extra 1.4 miles, using the service road.1 Instead of making a simple u-turn, a westbound driver must also travel the long and winding service road. As a result of the road project, the property is no longer suitable for its preconstruction retail use.
Under Palm Beach County v. Tessler, where all or part of access to an abutting road is destroyed, a taking occurs when a property owner’s right of access has been “substantially diminished,” taking into consideration the remaining access to the property. 538 So. 2d at 849. Tessler attempts to constitutionally balance the competing interests of property owners and government when evaluating the effects of road construction. From a practical standpoint, broad application of Tessler would make it expensive and difficult to plan and budget for new roads, since property far from the actual construction might ultimately be entitled to compensation.
Before and after Tessler, the supreme court has narrowly applied the concept of compensable “loss of access.” The trigger for beginning a Tessler analysis has been the destruction of direct access to property from an abutting road. In Department of Transportation v. Stubbs, 285 So. 2d 1, 2 (Fla.1973), a north-south road directly abutting the subject property was completely closed as a result of new construction. Tessler involved the construction of a retaining wall which blocked access to and visibility of the property owner’s business from the adjoining street. 588 So. 2d at 847. In Department of Transportation v. Gefen, 636 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 1994), the supreme court found no compensable taking resulting from the closing of an Interstate 95 entrance and exit ramp which diminished the traffic flow by the landowner’s property. Significant to the court’s decision was the absence of any change in access to roads directly abutting the property.
When access from abutting roads is denied to the point that it can be deemed “substantially diminished,” property rights which appertain to ownership of the land are disturbed.... However, the facts of this ease are significantly different from those in Tessler. Gefen’s access to all roads abutting her property is undiminished ....
Id. at 13462 (emphasis supplied). More recently, the supreme court found “no substantial loss of access” as a matter of law when the construction of a traffic control island in the middle of a street reduced one of two means of access from 44 feet to 27 feet in width. Weaver Oil Co. v. City of Tallahassee, 647 So. 2d 819 (Fla.1994).
Applying Tessler to this case, we agree with the trial court’s finding that appellees’ right of access was substantially diminished by the new construction. Direct access from eastbound State Road 84 no longer exists. Measured by time, distance, and difficulty of navigation, the new access route is more burdensome than that presented in Tessler. Appellees’ property is hardly visible from post construction State Road 84. Contrary to DOT’S contention, the property’s direct access to the new service road is not the same as the preconstruction direct access to State Road 84. The service road is a one way “road to nowhere” which spills into eastbound State Road 84 a considerable distance east of the subject property. Thus, this situation is distinguishable from the “traffic flow” eases, where diminution of traffic flow on an existing road did not support the finding of a taking. See Department of Transp. v. Rubano, 636 So. 2d 749, 751-52 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), review granted, 645 So. 2d 454 (Fla.1994); Division of Admin. v. Capital Plaza, Inc., 397 So. 2d 682 (Fla.1981); Gefen, 636 So. 2d at 1346. In each of these cases, there was post construction direct access to property from at least one lane of an abutting road.3 Accordingly, we hold that the trial court’s finding of a taking correctly applied Tessler to the facts.4
AFFIRMED.
KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. . To access the property, an eastbound driver on State Road 84 must continue past the property about 1200 feet to the intersection of S.W. 15th Avenue; perform a u-turn onto the westbound side of State Road 84; go back past the property and veer right onto a service road; continue on the service road as it u-turns back under State Road 84 to the one-way service road leading back to appellees' property.
. Gefen disapproved this court’s opinion in Department of Transportation v. Lakewood Travel Park, Inc., 580 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), which had expansively applied Tessler to find a taking where access to an abutting road was not changed, but access to that road was impacted by road construction away from the property.
. In Rubano, for example, we noted that "access to the abutting road was not eliminated by the widening of it.” 636 So. 2d at 752. There was access to the property from the westbound lane of State Road 84, which was also at issue in that case.
.This holding is consistent with two previous decisions of this court which found a Tessler taking involving properties similarly situated to the one at issue in this case. Department of Transp. v. Arms, 539 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Department of Transp. v. Burger King Corp., 574 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. S.W. Anderson, Inc., 744 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…, Gefen, and not Tessler, controlled. See id. at 1268. In State of Florida, Department of Transportation v. Kreider, the court found that new construction substantially diminished the landowner’s right of access, and thus a Tessler taking occurred. 658 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Kreider, like Tessler, lost all direct access to an abutting state highway by virtue of construction of a concrete retaining wall between the state highway and the Kreider’s property. See id. at 549. Although it found a Tessler…
-
State v. Suit City OF Aventura, 774 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…t can be said that the property owner’s right of access was substantially diminished. The loss of the most convenient access is not compensable where other suitable access continues to exist.” Tessler, at 849. In State Dept. of Transp. v. Kreider, 658 So. 2d 548, 549 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) the Fourth District Court of Appeal while dealing with inverse condemnation made an observation to be kept in mind: “Before and after Tessler, the supreme court has narrowly applied the concept of compensable ‘loss of acces…
-
Dep't OF Transp. v. Fisher, 958 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…t of Florida v. McCaffrey, 229 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); cf. Pinellas County v. Austin, 323 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Department of Transportation v. ABS, Inc., 336 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); and Department of Transportation v. Kreider, 658 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Accordingly, I would grant rehearing and affirm the summary judgment. . The record contains evidence that, following reconstruction, the controlled access designation of U.S. 19 will be more restrictive than that of the S.R.…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Palm Beach Cnty. v. Tessler, 538 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1989)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. Stubbs, 285 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1973)
- Division of Administration v. Cap. Plaza, Inc., 397 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 1981)
- Dep't OF Transp. v. L.I. Gefen, 636 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 1994)
- Weaver OIL Co. v. City OF Tallahassee, 647 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 1994)
- State v. Lakewood Travel Park, Inc., 580 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- State v. Arms, 539 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. Rubano, 636 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. Burger King Corp., 574 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Dietrich v. S. Floridabanc Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 574 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)