Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Blanca Mesa{ Florida Department of Afemorandum Environmental Proteetion CDO U CD December 9, 1994 f TO: Gary Cochran, Planning Manager Bureau of Land Management Services CD Z �f FROM: Frank Votra, Environmental Speci s_ office of Environmental Services CO r SUBJECT: Project Review Virginia Key, Miami, Florida`, Deed # 18730 The above cited deed, executed August 21, 1942 and the subsequent corrective deed executed February 11, 1953 stipulates that this conveyance is made on the condition that the area described be used by the: "City , _M�ami for harbors and airport construction and development and should any of said area e use for any purposes other 'han—that—harbor and airport constructions and development the title to said land is automatically reverted and becomes the E ro ort• cf the Trustees of the interna_ Impr6vement Fund of the Sta P �f Florida, the gran ors erein." The City of Miami now seeks to have the State of Florida waive this deed restriction claiming that the present deed restriction precludes the City of Miami.from beneficial use of these lands. All lands administered by the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (Trustees) are lands held in the public trust. The Public Trust Doctrine imposes a governmental "servitude" upon certain lands and water areas that are to be held in trust by the government for the benefit of all the people. There impairment or disposal is not done wit ou e utmost discretion. The Citv of Miami is_u der the false assumption that because the Trustees specifically stated that t ds couTc—be used only for eit era arbor or airport that bt_. P * re never used for the stated purpose the lands should now be relinquished by the Trustees --o he City for other uses. From my interpretation of this request if the Trustees where to waive the established deed restrictions it would be contradictory to the intent of the deed, and a violation of the State Constitution: s. 7, Art. II, and s. 11, Art. X. This matter will need to be reviewed fully by the Trustees as "The board of trustees shall not sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of any lands the title to which 'is vested in the board of trustees except by vote of at lease five of the seven trustees, 253.02(2) Board of trustees; powers and duties. The control of the Stat .e,r this_prope rty for the puffinQme of the trust was never lost. This land parcel was conveyed to the City without impairment of that public interest. R Page Two To further explain this position the State (Trustees) may grant parcels of public land for specific uses. The"Trustees did so for the lands in question on Virginia Key. This was a valid exercise of the Trustees legislative power consistent with the Trustees obligation to the public good at that time. The Trustees did not abdicate their control of the lands at Virginia Key but gave permission to the City to use the land for a port or airfield. One needs to look at the minutes of the Trustees for August 1942 to ascertain E e reason a _Lnd purpose t is parf-icu ar deed was granted. The United States was at war! The deed of lands for the "Greater Miami Air Base Project" as it was called at the time was based on the Curgent need on part of both the City and Federal government for expansion of air base facilities for both land and sea planes as well as docking space for ships. The minutes also state that: "Request was that the price for the land be as reasonable as possible owing to the public nature of the project and its need in connection with national defense." (Underlines my own.). The Trustees did not abdicate the trust doctrine over this property but administered its police power by assisting what was in the public interest at the time to preserve the peace in defense of this country. To assume, as the City of Miami has in this instance, that since the land purchased could not, or was not, used for its deeded purpose reneges the original intent of Trustees is false. The deed clearly states and the.City of Miami acknowledges that if the property is not used for its intended ;use, air and port facilities, it should revert back to the State. These lands should not be relin uished by the Trustees to the City_o Miami as to do so would impair the pu_ is rust tand the intent that ' was provide �-t-Te-Trustees. The above deed delegated to the City certain powers by the Trustees to use State Lands in defense of this country as part of the war effort. Since that use was never fulfilled and it is the right of the State, indeed it would be prudent for the Trustees to exercise its legal control and authority over the property and revoke those powers given by this deed and retain the property as the conditions stipulate. The City of Miami and Dade County are presently in violation of the covenant of the deed as the site isnow _usedasan dredge material disposal area. This was c early not the areas intended use expressed by the firestees and the land should reverttd--5-tatecontrol. /fv Submitted into the public record in connection with item PZ.1 on 10-08-09 Priscilla A. Thompson City Clerk