Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 161.151 (2025)
Definitions; ss. 161.141-161.211.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
161.151 Definitions; ss. 161.141-161.211.—As used in ss. 161.141-161.211:
(1) “Board of trustees” means the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund.
(2) “Requesting authority” means any coastal county, municipality, or beach erosion control district which requests a survey by the board of trustees under the provisions of ss. 161.141-161.211.
(3) “Erosion control line” means the line determined in accordance with the provisions of ss. 161.141-161.211 which represents the landward extent of the claims of the state in its capacity as sovereign titleholder of the submerged bottoms and shores of the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of America, and the bays, lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof on the date of the recording of the survey as authorized in s. 161.181.
(4) “Authorized beach restoration project” means a beach project authorized by the United States Congress or the department which involves a specific project engineering design and a project maintenance program for a period of not less than 10 years.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2001–2016 · leading case: Walton Cnty. v. Stop Beach Renourishment, 998 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 2008).
Walton Cnty. v. Stop Beach Renourishment, 998 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 2008). “[8] It is important to note that the question of a fixed boundary at the ECL only applies to the beaches "of the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the bays, lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof.”
Donovan v. Okaloosa Cnty., 82 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 2012). “Finally, the court ruled that many of the issues raised by appellants, such as the quality of the sand to be used in the restoration and where the erosion control line for the project would be located, were collateral to the bond validation proceedings and thus not appropriate…”
Wallace Corp. v. City of Miami Beach, 793 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “(1997); see also § 161.151(3), Fla. Stat. (1997). The Loew’s Miami Beach Convention Center Hotel is a joint project by the City and a private corporation.”
State, Dep't of Env't Prot. v. Beach Grp. Investments, LLC, 201 So. 3d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “” § 161.151(3), Fla. Stat. Because the project was seaward of the CCCL, Beach Group had to obtain a permit.”
— 161.151(3) — 4 cases
Walton Cnty. v. Stop Beach Renourishment, 998 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 2008). “[8] It is important to note that the question of a fixed boundary at the ECL only applies to the beaches "of the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the bays, lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof.”
Donovan v. Okaloosa Cnty., 82 So. 3d 801 (Fla. 2012). “Finally, the court ruled that many of the issues raised by appellants, such as the quality of the sand to be used in the restoration and where the erosion control line for the project would be located, were collateral to the bond validation proceedings and thus not appropriate…”
Wallace Corp. v. City of Miami Beach, 793 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “(1997); see also § 161.151(3), Fla. Stat. (1997). The Loew’s Miami Beach Convention Center Hotel is a joint project by the City and a private corporation.”
State, Dep't of Env't Prot. v. Beach Grp. Investments, LLC, 201 So. 3d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “” § 161.151(3), Fla. Stat. Because the project was seaward of the CCCL, Beach Group had to obtain a permit.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.