96-005883 Big Blue Springs Property Owners&Apos; Association, Inc. vs. Southwest Florida Water Management District And Department Of Environmental Protection
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Tuesday, August 17, 1999.


View Dockets  
Summary: Department of Environmental Protection proved entitlement to Noticed General Environmental Resource Permit, with condition to restore Big Blue Spring.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8BIG BLUE SPRINGS, INC., )

13)

14Petitioner, )

16)

17vs. ) Case No. 96-5883

22)

23SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

27MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

32corporation, and FLORIDA )

36DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

40PROTECTION, )

42)

43Respondents. )

45)

46PETER A. GRANT, )

50)

51Petitioner, )

53)

54vs. ) Case No. 96-5884

59)

60SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

64MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

69corporation, and FLORIDA )

73DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

77PROTECTION, )

79)

80Respondents. )

82)

83JOHN P. BABIARZ, )

87)

88Petitioner, )

90)

91vs. ) Case No. 96-5885

96)

97SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

101MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

106corporation, and FLORIDA )

110DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

114PROTECTION, )

116)

117Respondents. )

119)

120NORMA L. SPENCE and THOMAS )

126SPENCE, )

128)

129Petitioners, )

131)

132vs. ) Case No. 96-5886

137)

138SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

142MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

147corporation, and FLORIDA )

151DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

155PROTECTION, )

157)

158Respondents. )

160)

161JUDITH K. HALL and RUSSELL )

167D. HALL, )

170)

171Petitioners, )

173)

174vs. ) Case No. 96-5887

179)

180SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

184MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

189corporation, and FLORIDA )

193DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

197PROTECTION, )

199)

200Respondents. )

202)

203JANIFER CARLSON and )

207RICHARD CARLSON, )

210)

211Petitioners, )

213)

214vs. ) Case No. 96-5888

219)

220SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

224MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

229corporation, and FLORIDA )

233DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

237PROTECTION, )

239)

240Respondents. )

242)

243MR. AND MRS. MANFRED )

248RIENTENBACH, )

250)

251Petitioners, )

253)

254vs. ) Case No. 96-5889

259)

260SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER )

264MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public )

269corporation, and FLORIDA )

273DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL )

277PROTECTION, )

279)

280Respondents. )

282)

283RECOMMENDED ORDER

285A formal hearing was held in these cases before Larry J.

296Sartin, a duly-designated Administrative Law Judge of the

304Division of Administrative Hearings, on May 6 and 7, 1999, in

315Inverness, Florida.

317APPEARANCES

318For Petitioner, Big Blue Springs, Inc.:

324Clark A. Stillwell, Esquir e

329Brannen, Stillwell & Perrin, P.A.

334Bank of Inverness Building

338320 Highway 41 South

342Inverness, Florida 34451-0250

345For Petitioner, Peter A. Grant:

350Peter A. Grant, pro se

3557325 North Spring Run Terrace

360Hernando, Florida 34442

363For Petitioner, John P. Babiarz:

368Guy Marwick, Qualified Representative

37212950 Northeast First Street Road

377Silver Springs, Florida 34488

381For Petitioners, Thomas and Norma Spence:

387Norma L. and Thomas Spence, pro se

394Post Office Box 246

398Holder, Florida 34445

401For Petitioners, Judith K. and Russell D. Hall:

409Judith K. Hall and Russell D. Hall, pro se

4186875 East Halls Spring Path

423Hernando, Florida 34442

426For Petitioners, Janifer and Richard Carlson:

432Janifer Carlson, pro se

436Post Office Box 450

440Marble, North Carolina 28905

444For Petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Rientenbach:

451None

452For Respondent, Southwest Florida Water Management District:

459Margaret M. Lytle

462Assistant General Counsel

465Southwest Florida Water Management

469District

4702379 Broad Street

473Brooksville, Florida 34609-6899

476For Respondent, Florida Department of Environmental

482Protection:

483Keith L. Williams

486Assistant General Counsel

489Florida Department of Environmental

493Protection

4943900 Commonwealth Boulevard

497Mail Station 35

500Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000

504STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

508The issue in these cases is whether Respondent, the Florida

518Department of Environmental Protection, has provided Respondent,

525Southwest Florida Water Management District, with reasonable

532assurances that the activities proposed in its Noticed General

541Environmental Resource Permit No. 4715785.00 meet the conditions

549established in Section 373.413, Florida Statutes, and

556Rules 40D-400.215 and 40D-400.485, Florida Administrative Code,

563for issuance of general environmental resource permits.

570PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

572On or about September 23, 1996, the Florida Department of

582Environmental Protection submitted a permit application to the

590Southwest Florida Water Management District seeking approval of a

599project for the restoration of Big Blue Springs, a freshwater

609spring located in Citrus County, Florida. The permit was

618designated Noticed General Environmental Resource Permit No.

6254715785.00.

626By a letter dated October 22, 1996, the Southwest Florida

636Water Management District notified the Florida Department of

644Environmental Protection that it was authorized to proceed with

653the restoration of Big Blue Springs pursuant to the Noticed

663General Environmental Resource Permit, subject to the general

671conditions of Rule 40D-400.215, Florida Administrative Code, and

679the specific conditions of Rule 40D-400.485, Florida

686Administrative Code.

688In response to the Southwest Florida Water Management

696District's decision, Petitioners timely filed petitions with the

704Southwest Florida Water Management District challenging the

711decision. Those petitions were filed with the Division of

720Administrative Hearings by the Southwest Florida Water Management

728District on December 13, 1996. The petitions were designated

737Case No's. 96-5883 through 96-5889 and were assigned to the

747undersigned.

748On January 6, 1997, the cases were consolidated and placed

758in abeyance by an Order Granting Motion for Consolidation and

768Abatement of Proceeding. The cases were placed in abeyance to

778give the parties an opportunity to pursue mediation of their

788dispute. Efforts to reach a mediated settlement of the dispute

798in these cases eventually failed.

803On July 27, 1997, the Florida Department of Environmental

812Protection submitted a modified plan for the Big Blue Springs'

822project to the Southwest Florida Water Management District. The

831modification was reviewed, approved, and incorporated into the

839permit which is the subject of this proceeding.

847After holding these cases in abeyance to allow the

856completion of mediation efforts and to allow Petitioners an

865opportunity to recover from flooding on their property, the final

875hearing was scheduled for December 1998. The hearing was

884subsequently continued and rescheduled for May 5 through 7, 1999.

894On May 3, 1999, the parties filed a Prehearing Stipulation.

904The parties narrowed the issues to be addressed in these cases

915and stipulated to a few facts. Those facts have been included in

927this Recommended Order.

930The day before the commencement of the final hearing,

939Respondents filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Petitioners Big Blue

949Springs Property Owners' Association and Guy Marwich for Lack of

959Standing. Argument on the motion was heard at the commencement

969of the final hearing. The motion was disposed of by substituting

980Big Blue Springs, Inc., the successor in interest to Big Blue

991Springs Property Owners' Association, as Petitioner in Case No.

100096-5883, and by substituting John P. Babiarz, the successor in

1010interest to property formerly owned by Guy Marwick, as Petitioner

1020in Case No. 96-5885.

1024At the final hearing, the Florida Department of

1032Environmental Protection presented the testimony of Frederick

1039Hand, Deborah Jean Preble, and Joseph Edward Bowman. Mr. Bowman

1049was accepted as an expert witness. The Florida Department of

1059Environmental Protection also offered DEP Exhibits 1 through 20

1068into evidence. All were accepted.

1073The Southwest Florida Water Management District presented

1080the testimony of A. Paul Desmarais, Wojciech M. Mroz, and Leonard

1091F. Bartos. All three were accepted as expert witnesses. Three

1101Southwest Florida Water Management District exhibits were

1108accepted into evidence. Official recognition of District

1115Exhibits 4-6 was taken.

1119Petitioners presented the testimony of Sammy Joe Weaver,

1127Russell D. Hall, and Norma L. Spence. The following exhibits

1137were offered by Petitioners and accepted into evidence:

1145a. Springs Exhibits 1-11;

1149b. Spence Exhibits 1, 3-4, 5a and b, 6-7, 9-11, and 18-21;

1161c. Babiarz Exhibits 1-3;

1165d. Grant Exhibits 1-2; and

1170e. Hall Exhibits 1-2.

1174Petitioners in Case No. 96-5889, Mr. and Mrs. Manfred

1183Rietenbach, did not make an appearance at the final hearing.

1193A transcript of the formal hearing was filed on June 21,

12041999. By agreement of the parties, Proposed Recommended Orders

1213were required to be filed on or before July 12, 1999.

1224Respondents filed a Joint Proposed Recommended Order on July 12,

12341999. Petitioner, Big Blue Springs, Inc., filed a Proposed

1243Recommended Order on July 12, 1999. Petitioners, Norma and

1252Thomas Spence, and Russell and Judith Hall, filed letters

1261discussing the matter on July 6, 1999. Full consideration has

1271been given to these pleadings.

1276FINDINGS OF FACT

1279A. The Parties .

12831. Big Blue Springs, Inc., owns property located adjacent

1292to Big Blue Springs. Big Blue Springs, Inc., acquired its

1302interest from Big Blue Springs Property Owners' Association, Inc.

1311(hereinafter referred to as the "Property Owners' Association").

13202. The individual Petitioners in these cases own property

1329located along the current water flow from Big Blue Springs with

1340the exception that the evidence failed to prove whether

1349Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Rietenbach own property in proximity to Big

1360Blue Springs.

13623. Respondent, the Department of Environmental Protection

1369(hereinafter referred to as the "Department"), is an agency of

1380the State of Florida.

13844. Respondent, Southwest Florida Water Management District

1391(hereinafter referred to as the " SWFWMD"), is a public

1401corporation with regulatory jurisdiction over the administration

1408and enforcement of surface water management system rules pursuant

1417to Part IV, Chapter 373, Florida Statutes.

1424B. Big Blue Springs .

14295. Big Blue Springs (hereinafter referred to as the

"1438Spring"), is a moderately sized freshwater spring located in

1448Citrus County, Florida. The pool of the Spring is approximately

145875 feet in diameter.

14626. Water flows from the Spring at rates which vary between

147311.1 and 19.6 cubic feet per second.

14807. The Spring is located immediately adjacent to the

1489Withlacoochee River, an "Outstanding Florida Water."

14958. The Spring is located within the State of Florida's

1505sovereign lands. Therefore, the Spring comes under the

1513jurisdiction of the Department.

15179. Prior to the 1960's, the Spring connected directly with

1527the Withlacoochee River only a few feet from the location of the

1539pool of the Spring. The natural flow of water from the Spring

1551was in an east-northeast direction. Water also flowed in a

1561northwesterly direction into wetlands which surrounded the

1568Withlacoochee River.

1570C. The Diversion of the Spring's Natural Flow .

157910. During the 1960's a developer constructed a dike around

1589the Spring damming up the Spring's natural connection with the

1599Withlacoochee River. The dike was illegally placed on state

1608sovereign lands under the Department's jurisdiction.

161411. The developer also dredged a canal (hereinafter

1622referred to as the "Spring Run") in a northwesterly direction

1633from the Spring. The Spring Run connected the Spring with the

1644Withlacoochee River. The distance from the pool of the Spring to

1655the Withlacoochee River is approximately one half mile.

166312. The dredging of the canal and the damming of the

1674natural connection with the Withlacoochee River diverted the

1682portion of the water discharge from the Spring that had flowed

1693directly into the Withlacoochee River down the Spring Run. As a

1704result of the damning of the Spring, all water from the Spring

1716has flowed down the Spring Run since the 1960's.

172513. The construction of the dike around the Spring and the

1736dredging of the Spring Run was carried out without a permit or

1748sovereign land-use authorization.

1751D. The Spring Run Today .

175714. The Spring Run is not of a uniform depth or width. At

1770places, the Spring Run is 15 to 20 feet wide. The depth of water

1784in the Spring Run also varies throughout the year. At times, the

1796area surrounding the Spring and Spring Run is flooded. At other

1807times, water in the Spring Run is of minimal depth.

181715. The Spring Run has developed into a functioning

1826ecological wetland system consisting of various marine species

1834and habitats.

183616. A small one-lane bridge spans the Spring Run

1845approximately a quarter of a mile from the Spring.

1854E. Access to the Spring Today .

186117. There is no legal access by land to the Spring. Even

1873if access by land were legally available, such access would be

1884difficult because the dike is approximately 10 feet tall and has

1895steep slopes.

189718. Access by water to the Spring is limited to access

1908through the Spring Run. Access along the Spring Run to the

1919Spring is, however, not possible for many boats due to the lack

1931of water depth. When water levels are low, access is further

1942reduced.

194319. Access along the Spring Run during times of high water

1954is also limited due to the small bridge that spans the Spring

1966Run. At times, the water is too high for even small boats to

1979pass under the bridge.

198320. Despite its limitations, the Spring Run is navigable,

1992at least to small boats, the majority of the year.

2002F. The Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund's

2012Decision to Remove the Dike .

201821. In March 1990, the dike around the Spring was

2028mysteriously breached, reconnecting the Spring and the

2035Withlacoochee River.

203722. The Property Owners' Association obtained permission

2044from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department to repair the

2056breach.

205723. After repairing the breach in the dike, the Property

2067Owners' Association applied to the Governor and Cabinet, sitting

2076in their capacity as the Board of Trustees of the Internal

2087Improvement Fund (hereinafter referred to as the "Trustees"), for

2097an easement allowing them to maintain the dike for 25 years.

210824. In response to the request of the Property Owners'

2118Association for an easement, a public meeting was held by the

2129Department in Inverness, Citrus County, Florida, in the summer of

21391993. The meeting was advertised in the local newspaper as an

2150opportunity for the public to discuss the Spring and what should

2161be done about public access to the Spring. That meeting was well

2173attended by members of the public, including several Petitioners.

218225. Following the public meeting and after discussions with

2191the Property Owners' Association, the Department initially

2198indicated that it would recommend to the Trustees that the

2208easement application be approved. That recommendation was based

2216upon negotiations with, and an offered settlement from, the

2225Property Owners' Association:

2228Staff believed that the homeowners' offer

2234represented a reasonable compromise for this

2240issue on the condition that the homeowners'

2247association agreed to hold the state harmless

2254for any liability arising out of the continued

2262presence of the dike and to issue a quitclaim

2271deed to the Board of Trustees for all lands

2280located below the historic ordinary high water

2287line of the spring.

2291DEP Exhibit 16. Throughout the period of time during

2300which the Department considered the Property Owners'

2307Association's requested permission to maintain the

2313Spring dike, the Property Owners' Association was aware

2321of the Department's concern over the need to ensure

2330public access to the Spring.

233526. On October 21, 1993, the Property Owners' Association

2344informed the Department that it would not agree to all the terms

2356of the settlement the Department desired. In particular, the

2365Property Owners' Association was unwilling to give the Department

2374assurances concerning public access to the Spring. As a

2383consequence, the Department decided not to support approval of

2392the easement application.

239527. The Property Owners' Association was informed of the

2404Department's decision by letter dated October 27, 1993. A copy

2414of the letter was also sent to Ms. Spence. The Department

2425informed the Property Owners' Association that it was going to

2435make the following recommendation to the Trustees:

2442RESCIND STAFF'S APRIL 6, 1993, LETTER, DIRECT

2449STAFF TO HAVE THE DIKE REMOVED, AND HAVE THE

2458SPRING RESTORED TO ITS NATURAL FEATURES .

246528. The meeting at which the Trustees was to consider the

2476Property Owners' Association easement application was scheduled

2483for November 9, 1993. The meeting was advertised in Vol. 19, No.

249543, Florida Administrative Weekly (October 29, 1993). The notice

2504did not specifically indicate that the Trustees would consider

2513the removal of the dike or the permit which is the subject of

2526this proceeding at the meeting.

253129. The Property Owners' Association easement application

2538and the Department's recommendation concerning the easement and

2546removal of the dike were included on the agenda for the

2557November 9, 1993, meeting of the Governor and Cabinet.

256630. The November 9, 1993, meeting of the Governor and

2576Cabinet was held in Tallahassee. The meeting was open to the

2587public and recorded. The Property Owners' Association was

2595represented at the meeting. Ms. Spence also attended the

2604meeting.

260531. During the meeting a number of issues concerning the

2615fate of the Spring were discussed, including whether an easement

2625should be granted to the Property Owners' Association and whether

2635the Department's recommendation should be approved. Public

2642access to the Spring was discussed by, and constituted a primary

2653concern of, the trustees. The Trustees also discussed the impact

2663which boats would have on the Spring if allowed into the Spring,

2675the impact on the Spring Run if the restoration of the Spring was

2688ordered, and the intrusion of tannic-stained water from the

2697Withlacoochee River into the Spring.

270232. A copy of the permit at issue in this proceeding was

2714not available at the November 9, 1993, Trustees' meeting. Nor

2724were conceptual plans for the restoration of the Spring

2733available.

273433. The Trustees denied the requested easement and directed

2743the Department "to have the dike removed and the spring restored

2754to its natural features."

275834. The Trustees' decision was subsequently challenged

2765before the Division of Administrative Hearings by the Property

2774Owners' Association. A Final Order was entered by the Trustees

2784on November 16, 1995, rejecting the challenge.

2791G. The Department's Efforts to Carry Out the Trustees'

2800Decision .

280235. In February and May 1996, following entry of the Final

2813Order, the Deputy Secretary of the Department met with Department

2823staff. Pursuant to delegated authority, the Deputy Secretary

2831directed staff to proceed with the removal of a section of the

2843dike in order to restore the flow of the Spring into the

2855Withlacoochee River at the approximate location of the natural

2864flow from the Spring into the river.

287136. On or about September 23, 1996, the Department

2880submitted an application to the SWFWMD for a permit to restore

2891the Spring. The application included the proposed removal of a

2901portion of the dike adjacent to the Withlacoochee River and the

2912stabilization of the dike with limestone rip-rap.

291937. On October 22, 1996, the SWFWMD issued Noticed General

2929Environmental Resource Permit No. 4715785.00 to the Department

2937approving the Big Blue Springs Restoration Project, subject to

2946the general conditions of Rule 40D-400.215, Florida

2953Administrative Code, and the special conditions of Rule 40D-

2962400.485, Florida Administrative Code.

296638. At the suggestion of some of the Petitioners, the

2976Department retained Paul Pilney, a soil scientist with the Soil

2986Conservation Service of the United States Department of

2994Agriculture. Mr. Pilney conducted soil soundings, soil borings,

3002and surveys of the area in an effort to estimate the location and

3015elevation of the original Spring runoff.

302139. Using Mr. Pilney's findings, the Department modified

3029its proposed location of the breach in the dike and reduced the

3041width of the breach. The depth of the proposed breach was not,

3053however, modified. The Department submitted modified plans and

3061an amendment to its permit application to the SWFWMD on July 27,

30731997. The SWFWMD reviewed and approved the modifications and

3082incorporated them into the permit.

308740. The Department held at least one public meeting on the

3098proposed restoration project. The proposed restoration project

3105was approved by the Secretary of the Department.

3113H. The Proposed Restoration Project .

311941. The Department's proposed restoration project

3125(hereinafter referred to as the "Restoration Project") is

3134technically simple: it entails the removal of a portion of a

3145water control structure, a dike, in order to partially restore

3155the natural flow of water between the Spring and the

3165Withlacoochee River.

316742. In order to carry out the Restoration Project, the

3177Department has proposed breaching the dike by removing

3185approximately 500 cubic yards of earth from the dike between the

3196Spring and the Withlacoochee River.

320143. The Department has proposed that the breach be graded

3211to an elevation of 31 feet above mean sea level. This depth was

3224based upon Mr. Pilney's findings of the estimated natural depth

3234of the Spring runoff. The depth is only an estimate, however.

3245There is no absolute way of determining the precise depth of the

3257natural Spring runoff into the Withlacoochee River.

326444. The Department has proposed the use of floating

3273barriers and turbidity screens while the Restoration Project is

3282being carried out.

328545. The Restoration Project will be completed by the

3294placement of limerock rip-rap along the slopes and back of the

3305Spring to control erosion. The limerock rip-rap will consist of

3315limerock boulders and/or rubble, weighing approximately 135

3322pounds per square foot. Limerock will be used because it occurs

3333naturally along the Withlacoochee River.

333846. The disturbed areas around the Spring will also be

3348revegetated immediately after construction.

335247. "No Motorboating" signs will be erected around the area

3362in the interest of public safety and in an effort to limit prop

3375dredging by boats that enter the Spring.

3382I. Impacts from the Restoration Project .

338948. The Restoration Project will not cause pollution.

3397Water quality and health standards will not be violated.

340649. The Restoration Project will not degrade water quality

3415or cause a violation of state water quality standards, including

3425special standards set for Outstanding Florida Waters.

343250. Although dark, tannic-stained water from the

3439Withlacoochee River will mix with the nearly crystal clear water

3449of the Spring on occasion, the water quality of the Spring will

3461not be degraded or adversely impacted. Water from the Spring

3471already mixes with the Withlacoochee River. After the breach, it

3481will just mix with the Withlacoochee River a little sooner.

349151. The Restoration Project will improve public access to

3500the Spring. The need to access the Spring by locating and

3511traversing the Spring Run will be eliminated. Accessing the

3520Spring illegally by land will also be eliminated. Access to the

3531Spring will be available by the larger boats which can navigate

3542the Withlacoochee River.

354552. The 31-inch depth to which the Department has proposed

3555that the new access channel be cut is lower than the current

3567depth of the Spring Run. As a consequence, the amount of water

3579which will run down the Spring Run will be dramatically reduced

3590by the Restoration Project.

359453. The impact of the reduced water flow in the Spring Run

3606will reduce the already somewhat limited navigability of the

3615Spring Run. The Spring Run will remain navigable only on an

3626intermittent basis.

362854. The limited flow of water through the Spring Run will

3639also reduce the extent to which the Spring Run currently is a

3651functioning ecological wetland system.

365555. If the depth to which the breach is graded were less

3667than the 31 inches proposed by the Department and were limited to

3679a depth no more than that of the flow from the Spring into the

3693Spring Run, there would be no appreciable decrease in the public

3704access to the Spring which the Department and the Trustees wish

3715to insure is provided by the restoration of the Spring. Public

3726access would still be readily available, and the negative impact

3736on the ecological wetland system of the Spring Run and the

3747navigability of the Spring Run would be decreased.

3755CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

3758A. Jurisdiction and Burden of Proof .

376556. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

3772jurisdiction of the parties to, and the subject matter of, this

3783proceeding. Section 120.57, Florida Statutes (1997).

378957. The burden of proof, absent a statutory directive to

3799the contrary, is on the party asserting the affirmative of the

3810issue in a proceeding before the Division of Administrative

3819Hearings. Antel v. Department of Professional Regulation , 522

3827So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Department of Transportation v.

3838J.W.C. Co., Inc. , 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); and Balino

3851v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services , 348 So. 2d

3861249 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

386658. In this proceeding, it is the Department that was

3876asserting the affirmative: that the Department should be issued

3885a permit for construction or alteration pursuant to Section

3894373.413, Florida Statutes. The Department, therefore, had the

3902ultimate burden of proof. The Department was required to meet

3912its burden by the preponderance of the evidence. J.W.C. Co. ,

3922supra .

392459. In order for the Department to meet its burden of

3935proof, it was required to present a prima facie showing of

3946entitlement to the permit taking into account the objections

3955raised by Petitioners. The Department met its burden, except

3964with regard to the depth to which the breach should be dredged.

397660. Following the presentation of the Department's prima

3984facie case, Petitioners had the burden of proving the allegations

3994of their petitions. The evidence presented by Petitioners in

4003support of their petitions was required to be of at least

4014equivalent quality to the evidence presented by the Department.

4023See Hoffert v. St. Joe Paper Company , 12 F.A.L.R. 4972 (Fla.

4034Dept. of Env. Reg. 1990). Petitioners failed to prove that the

4045permit should not be issued with conditions.

4052B. Standing .

405561. In order for any person to have standing to institute a

4067proceeding under Section 120.57, Florida Statutes, it must be

4076proved that the person is "substantially affected" by the

4085government action at issue in the proceeding:

4092Standing under the Administrative Procedure

4097Act ( APA) is conferred on persons whose

4105substantial interest will be affected by

4111proposed agency action. Agrico Chemical Co.

4117v. Department of Environmental Protection ,

4122406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1981), rev.

4130denied , 415 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 1982), and 415

4138So.2d 1361 (Fla. 1982). . . .

4145A party seeking to show a substantial injury

4153must demonstrate

41551) that he will suffer an injury in fact

4164which is of sufficient immediacy to entitle

4171him to a section 120.57 hearing, and 2) that

4180his substantial injury is of the type or

4188nature which the proceeding is designed to

4195protect.

4196Agrico , supra at 482. Florida Society of

4203Ophthalmology v. State Bd. Of Optometry , 532

4210So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), rev. denied ,

4219542 So. 2d 1333 (Fla. 1989).

4225Friends of the Everglades, Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the

4236Internal Improvement Trust Fund , 595 So. 2d 186, 188 (Fla. 1st

4247DCA 1992).

424962. The evidence in these cases proved that all of the

4260Petitioners, except Mr. and Mrs. Rietenbach, own property located

4269in close proximity to the Spring or the Spring Run. Petitioners,

4280other than Mr. and Mrs. Reitenbach, have, therefore, proved that

4290they will be substantially affected by the Department's proposed

4299restoration project. See Friends of the Everglades , supra ; Town

4308of Palm Beach v. Department of Natural Resources , 577 So. 2d 1383

4320(Fla. 4th DCA 1991); and Sheridan v. Deep Lagoon Marina , 576 So.

43322d 771 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).

433863. Mr. and Mrs. Rietenbach have failed to prove their

4348standing to institute this proceeding.

4353C. Permits for Construction or Alteration Projects .

436164. Section 373.413, Florida Statutes, authorizes the

4368issuance of permits for certain construction or alteration

4376projects:

4377(1) Except for the exemptions set forth

4384herein, the governing board or the department

4391may require such permits and impose such

4398reasonable conditions as are necessary to

4404assure that the construction or alteration of

4411any stormwater management system, dam,

4416impoundment, reservoir, appurtenant work, or

4421works will comply with the provisions of this

4429part and applicable rules promulgated thereto

4435and will not be harmful to the water

4443resources of the district. . . .

445065. In these cases, the SWFWMD is the "governing board"

4460with authority to issue a permit pursuant to Section 373.413,

4470Florida Statutes.

447266. In order to implement Section 373.413, Florida

4480Statutes, the SWFWMD has promulgated Rule 40D-400.485(1), Florida

4488Administrative Code, authorizing the issuance of general permits

4496to the Department:

4499(1) A general permit is hereby granted to

4507the Department for the construction,

4512alteration, operation, maintenance, removal

4516and abandonment of systems to implement

4522Department environmental restoration or

4526enhancement projects.

452867. Rule 40D-400.485(2), Florida Administrative Code,

4534establishes three procedures, one of which must be followed by

4544the Department in order for the Department to qualify for a

4555general permit. The procedure elected by the Department in this

4565matter is the following procedure:

4570(b) The project is approved by the

4577Secretary of the Department after conducting

4583at least one public meeting;

458868. Rule 40D-400.485(3), Florida Administrative Code,

4594establishes the following conditions (hereinafter referred to as

4602the "Specific Permit Conditions") which the Department must meet

4612in order to qualify for a general permit:

4620(3) This general permit shall be subject to

4628the following specific conditions:

4632(a) A project under this general permit

4639shall not significantly impede navigation.

4644(b) All erodible ground areas and slopes

4651disturbed during construction shall be

4656revegetated with sod, mulch, seed, wetland

4662species, or otherwise appropriately

4666stabilized within 72 hours after completion

4672of the activity authorized under this general

4679permit and at any other time as necessary to

4688prevent violations of state water quality

4694standards.

469569. In addition to the Specific Permit Conditions, the

4704SWFWMD has established general conditions for the issuance of all

4714general permits (hereinafter referred to as the "General Permit

4723Conditions"). Rule 40D-400.215, Florida Administrative Code.

473070. The General Permit Conditions which must be met include

4740the following:

4742(12) Construction, alteration, operation,

4746maintenance, removal and abandonment approved

4751by this general permit shall be conducted in

4759a manner which does not cause violations of

4767state water quality standards, including any

4773antidegradation provisions of sections 62-

47784.242(1)(a) and (b), 62-4.242(2) and (3), and

478562-302.300, F.A.C., and any special standards

4791for Outstanding Florida Waters and

4796Outstanding National Resource Waters. The

4801permittee shall implement best management

4806practices for erosion, turbidity, and other

4812pollution control to prevent violation of

4818state water quality standards. Temporary

4823erosion control measures such as sodding,

4829mulching, and seeding shall be implemented

4835and shall be maintained on all erodible

4842ground areas prior to and during

4848construction. Permanent erosion control

4852measures such as sodding and planting of

4859wetland species shall be completed within

4865seven days of any construction activity.

4871Turbidity barriers shall be installed and

4877maintained at all locations where the

4883possibility of transferring suspended solids

4888into wetlands or surface waters exists due to

4896the permitted activity. Turbidity barriers

4901shall remain in place and shall be maintained

4909in a functional condition at all locations

4916until construction is completed, soils are

4922stabilized and vegetation has been

4927established. Thereafter the permittee shall

4932correct any erosion or shoaling that causes

4939adverse impacts to the water resources.

4945Rule 40D-400.215(12), Florida Administrative Code.

4950D. The Department's Restoration Project .

495671. The evidence in these cases proved that the

4965Department's Restoration Project constitutes the "construction,

4971alteration, operation, maintenance, removal and abandonment of

4978systems to implement Department environmental restoration or

4985enhancement projects."

498772. In particular, the project involves the "alteration" or

"4996removal" of a water control system (a dike) by the Department in

5008order to restore the natural flow of water from the Spring to the

5021Withlacoochee River.

502373. The Restoration Project is, therefore, entitled to

5031general permitting pursuant to Rule 40D-400.485(1), Florida

5038Administrative Code, if the Department has followed one of the

5048specified procedures which must be followed in order to qualify

5058for a permit and the Department has given assurances that all the

5070Specific and General Permit Conditions for such permits will be

5080met.

5081E. The Qualification Procedure Elected by the Department .

509074. The only one of the three qualification procedures

5099provided in Rule 40D-400.485(2), Florida Administrative Code,

5106which the Department attempted to follow in order to qualify the

5117Restoration Project for a permit is Rule 40D-400.485(2)(b),

5125Florida Administrative Code: "The project is approved by the

5134Secretary of the Department after conducting at least one public

5144meeting."

514575. There was no dispute that the Secretary of the

5155Department approved the Restoration Project. Whether the

5162Department conducted the requisite "public meeting" is more

5170problematic. While the Department could have conducted a "public

5179meeting" in a more meaningful way, the weight of the evidence

5190proved that the Department adequately conducted a "public

5198meeting."

519976. The SWFWMD does not provide a definition of "public

5209meeting." At a minimum, however, any meeting conducted by the

5219Department should have been conducted after notice to the public

5229of the meeting and should have been open to public participation.

524077. The evidence concerning the meetings that were

5248conducted prior to the SWFWMD's proposed approval of the

5257Department's general permit is not in dispute. Two noticed

5266meetings, both of which were open to the general public, were

5277held prior to the Secretary of the Department's approval of the

5288project: one was conducted during the summer of 1993 and the

5299other was conducted on November 9, 1993.

530678. The meeting conducted during the summer of 1993 was

5316locally advertised and locally conducted. Although the meeting

5324was not specifically noticed as a meeting to consider specific

5334plans to restore the natural flow of the Spring to the

5345Withlacoochee River, it was conducted to hear from the public

5355generally about what should be done about the Spring and public

5366access thereto.

536879. The meeting conducted on November 9, 1993, was not

5378locally advertised and was held in Tallahassee instead of Citrus

5388County. It was, however, advertised, open to the public, and was

5399attended by some of the Petitioners in these cases.

540880. The meetings, according to Petitioners, suffered from

5416the following deficiencies: (a) no specific plans detailing the

5425nature of the Restoration Project were available at either

5434meeting; (b) the November 9, 1993, meeting was held in

5444Tallahassee; and (c) notice was not given that the meetings would

5455be to discuss removal of a part of the dike.

546581. While the deficiencies raised by Petitioners cause

5473concern, the meetings conducted by the Department were sufficient

5482for purposes of meeting the "public meeting" requirement of Rule

549240D-400.485, Florida Administrative Code. The purpose of the

5500rule is to ensure that the public has an opportunity to be heard

5513and that the Department has been given the opportunity to

5523consider all options concerning any decision the Department might

5532need to make in order to restore or enhance a water control

5544system before it decides what course of action to take. If the

5556rule contemplated consideration of the specific Department plan

5564of restoration for a project, it would be necessary for the

5575Department to conduct a meeting every time it made a modification

5586to the project. Interpreting the rule to require such a result

5597would be unreasonable.

560082. The meeting conducted by the Department in the summer

5610of 1993 was intended to fulfill the intent for the public meeting

5622requirement of the rule. Although the meeting was not advertised

5632as a meeting to consider specific restoration plans, it was

5642advertised as a meeting to consider what action should be taken

5653with regard to the Spring. All options, including restoration,

5662were open to discussion at the meeting and the advertisement put

5673the public on notice of this possibility. The meeting was also

5684held locally.

568683. The meeting held on November 9, 1993, also was intended

5697to fulfill the intent of the public meeting requirement of the

5708rule. Again, notice published in the Florida Administrative

5716Weekly was broad enough to suggest that any action might be

5727taken. Additionally, some Petitioners were given individual

5734notice of the meeting and the fact that the Department intended

5745to recommend that the Spring be restored. Finally, a clear

5755alternative to the easement being sought by the Property Owners'

5765Association was removal of the dike or a portion thereof. While

5776the meeting did not include a consideration of the specifics of

5787the proposed restoration, the public meeting requirement of the

5796rule does not require consideration of every aspect of a

5806restoration project in order to meet the public meeting

5815requirement. All that is required is that the general subject of

5826restoration be considered and discussed at the meeting. The

5835November 9, 1993, meeting met this requirement. The meeting was,

5845therefore, noticed and open to the public. The meeting was,

5855therefore, a "public meeting."

585984. Based upon the foregoing, it is concluded that the

5869procedure of Rule 40D-400.485(2)(b), Florida Administrative Rule,

5876was complied with by the Department.

5882F. Specific Permit Conditions .

588785. The first Specific Permit Condition requires that the

5896Department give reasonable assurances that the project will "not

5905significantly imped navigation."

590886. The parties stipulated, and the evidence supported a

5917finding, that the Spring Run is navigable. The evidence also

5927proved that the use of the Spring Run for water navigation will

5939be reduced by the Restoration Project. Establishing a channel

5948directly to the river with a depth of 31 inches will cause the

5961majority of water from the Spring to run into the Withlacoochee

5972River. Due to natural fluctuations in water flow in the Spring

5983and the Withlacoochee River, there will be times when very little

5994water will flow into the Spring Run and times when the waters of

6007the Withlacoochee River will flood the Spring and the Spring Run.

601887. As a result of the Restoration Project, the Spring Run

6029will receive intermittent water flow from the Spring, rather than

6039the total Spring flow the Spring Run currently enjoys. As a

6050consequence, the times when the level of water in the Spring Run

6062will make navigation virtually impossible for most boats of any

6072size will increase after completion of the Restoration Project as

6082currently proposed.

608488. Viewed only from the standpoint of the impact of the

6095Restoration Project on the Spring Run, the evidence proved that

6105navigation on the Spring Run, which is sovereign land of the

6116State, will be impeded by the Restoration Project as currently

6126proposed.

612789. Based upon a balanced consideration of the impact of

6137the Department's project on the Spring Run and the Spring and

6148access thereto, the evidence proved that the Department's project

6157will enhance overall navigation to the Spring.

616490. Currently, there is no legal access to the Spring

6174except through the Spring Run. Navigation by the general public

6184along the Spring Run to the Spring is limited to relatively small

6196boats due to the lack of depth of water in the Spring Run. When

6210water levels are low, that access is even further reduced because

6221of the lack of depth and the amount of vegetation that exists in

6234places. During periods of higher water levels, access may be

6244further limited due to the low bridge that spans the Spring Run.

6256As a consequence of current conditions, navigation to the Spring

6266by the Spring Run is limited.

627291. With the restoration of the natural Spring run directly

6282into the Withlacoochee River, the public will have direct access

6292to the Spring essentially without regard to water depths. A

6302wider variety of water craft will be able to access the Spring.

6314Even with periods of low water levels from the Spring, the run

6326off from the Spring into the River will still constitute

6336sovereign lands of the State which can be traversed by the

6347public.

634892. While Petitioners' enjoyment of the Spring Run,

6356including navigation thereon, will be negatively impacted more

6364frequently than under current conditions, the overall benefit to

6373the public from the return of the natural access to the Spring

6385from the Withlacoochee River outweighs this negative impact. See

6394Sullivan v. Northwest Florida Water Management District , DOAH

6402Case Nos. 84-4468 and 87-0124 (1987 WL 62062). The public

6412benefit is even more substantial when the fact that the Spring

6423Run was created illegally is taken into account.

643193. The evidence also proved that, even if the depth of the

6443Department's new proposed access channel is cut no deeper than

6453the existing depth of the Spring Run, the public access which the

6465Department desires to create by restoration of the Spring will be

6476achievable. Cutting the channel to a deeper depth will not

6486enhance access appreciably over the access that could be created

6496by maintaining a depth equal to that of the Spring Run.

650794. The final Specific Permit Condition requires that the

6516Department give reasonable assurances that all " erodible ground

6524areas and slopes disturbed during construction" will be

6532revegetated and stabilized. The Department has met this

6540condition.

6541G. The General Permit Conditions .

654795. The evidence presented by Respondents in these cases

6556proved that the Department's project will have minimal impacts on

6566water resources of the SWFWMD. While the evidence proved that

6576water quantities in the Spring Run will be decreased, no evidence

6587was presented by Petitioners to indicate that the quality of

6597whatever water does traverse the Spring Run will be negatively

6607impacted by the Department's project.

661296. The only evidence presented by Petitioners concerning

6620water qualities was to suggest that when the waters of the

6631Withlacoochee River, which are very dark and tannic stained, mix

6641with water from the Spring, the Spring's water will no longer be

6653as crystal clear as it is now. This antidotal evidence, however,

6664failed to counter evidence presented by Respondent that the

6673darkness of the water does not mean that the water is of a lesser

6687quality.

668897. The evidence also proved that the Department will

6697ensure implementation of the best management practices for

6705erosion, turbidity, and other pollution control to prevent

6713violation of state water quality standards.

6719H. Rule 40D-400.201, Florida Administrative Code .

672698. Although not argued in Big Blue Springs, Inc., in its

6737Proposed Recommended Order, it was suggested at hearing that the

6747Restoration Project is inconsistent with Rule 40D-400.210,

6754Florida Administrative Code, titled "Policy and Purpose"

6761(hereinafter referred to as the "Policy and Purpose Rule"):

6771The purpose of Part II of this chapter is to

6781provide noticed general environmental

6785resource permits for those activities which

6791have been determined to have minimal impacts

6798to the water resources of the District , both

6806individually and cumulatively. Mitigation is

6811neither necessary nor required for activities

6817that qualify for noticed general permits.

6823Persons wishing to use one or more of the

6832noticed general permits in this chapter shall

6839be subject to the notice provisions of

6846section 40D-400.211, F.A.C., before any

6851activity is conducted as authorized herein.

6857The general conditions provided pursuant to

6863section 40D-400.215, F.A.C., shall apply to

6869all of the general permits in this chapter.

6877Strict compliance with all of the terms,

6884conditions, requirements, limitations and

6888restrictions applicable to a desired noticed

6894general permit under this Part is required to

6902qualify for such a permit. [Emphasis added].

690999. In particular, Big Blue Springs, Inc., has suggested

6918that the Spring Run is a "water resource of the District" and

6930that the Department's project will have more than "minimal

6939impacts" on it. This argument is not supported by the evidence

6950or the intent of the Policy and Purpose Rule.

6959100. The Policy and Purpose Rule does not establish

6968conditions for noticed general permits in addition to the more

6978specific requirements established in Chapter 40D-400, Florida

6985Administrative Code. The Policy and Purpose Rule is merely a

6995summary of the SWFWMD's rationale for promulgating Chapter 40D-

7004400, Florida Administrative Code. It is presumed that any

7013project which meets the general and specific conditions of

7022Chapter 40D-400, Florida Administrative Code, which apply to a

7031particular permit, will necessarily be in conformity with the

7040Policy and Purpose Rule.

7044101. If the Special Permit Conditions and the General

7053Permit Conditions are met by the Restoration Project, the

7062Department's project will necessarily have minimal impacts on all

7071water resources of the SWFWMD, including the Spring Run.

7080I. Conclusion .

7083102. Based upon the weight of the evidence, the Department

7093should be allowed to issue a Noticed General Environmental

7102Resource Permit for the Restoration Project, subject to the

7111conditions imposed by the SWFWMD.

7116103. An additional condition, however, should be added to

7125the permit: the permit should be conditioned upon the depth of

7136the breach between the Spring and the Withlacoochee Rive being

7146limited to a depth of no more than that of the flow from the

7160Spring into the Spring Run. By equaling the depths of the two

7172channels public access to the Spring will be provided and the

7183negative impact on the ecological wetland system of the Spring

7193Run and the navigability of the Spring Run will be decreased.

7204RECOMMENDATION

7205Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

7215Law, it is

7218RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered by the Southwest

7228Florida Water Management District authorizing the Department of

7236Environmental Protection to proceed with construction under

7243Noticed General Environmental Resource Permit No. 4715785.00,

7250modified to provide that the depth of the breach between the

7261Spring and the Withlacoochee Rive being limited to a depth of no

7273more than that of the flow from the Spring into the Spring Run.

7286It is further

7289RECOMMENDED that the request for hearing filed by Mr. and

7299Mrs. Manfred Rientenbach be Dismissed.

7304DONE AND ENTERED this 17th day of August, 1999, in

7314Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

7318___________________________________

7319LARRY J. SARTIN

7322Administrative Law Judge

7325Division of Administrative Hearings

7329The DeSoto Building

73321230 Apalachee Parkway

7335Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

7338(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

7342Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

7346www.doah.state.fl.us

7347Filed with the Clerk of the

7353Division of Administrative Hearings

7357this 17th d ay of August, 1999.

7364COPIES FURNISHED:

7366Clark A. Stillwell, Esquire

7370Brannen, Stillwell and Perrin, P.A.

7375Bank of Inverness Building

7379320 Highway 41 South

7383Inverness, Florida 34451-0250

7386Peter A. Grant

73897325 North Spring Run Terrace

7394Hernando, Florida 34442

7397Guy Marwick

739912950 Northeast First Street Road

7404Silver Springs, Florida 34488

7408Norma L. and Thomas Spence

7413Post Office Box 246

7417Holder, Florida 34445

7420Judith K. Hall and Russell D. Hall

74276875 East Halls Spring Path

7432Hernando, Florida 34442

7435Janifer Carlson and Richard Carlson

7440Post Office Box 450

7444Marble, North Carolina 28905

7448Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Rietenbach

745310825 Nina Street

7456Largo, Florida 33778

7459Margaret M. Lytle, Assistant General Counsel

7465Southwest Florida Water Management

7469District

74702379 Broad Street

7473Brooksville, Florida 34609-6899

7476Andrew J. Baumann, Assistant General Counsel

7482Keith L. Williams, Assistant General Counsel

7488Florida Department of Environmental

7492Protection

74933900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35

7499Tallahassee, Florida 32399

7502Kathy Carter, Agency Clerk

7506Florida Department of Environmental

7510Protection

75113900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35

7517Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

7520F. Perry Odom, General Counsel

7525Florida Department of Environmental

7529Protection

75303900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35

7536Tallahasee, Florida 32399-3000

7539NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

7545All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

7556days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to

7567this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will

7578issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
Date: 11/01/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Entry of Final Order No. SWF 99-32 filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/28/1999
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 10/28/1999
Proceedings: Recommended Order
Date: 09/01/1999
Proceedings: Petitioner, Big Blue Springs, Inc.`s Exceptions to Recommended Order (filed via facsimile).
Date: 08/31/1999
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from R. & J. Hill Re: Judgment (filed via facsimile).
Date: 08/31/1999
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. & T. Spence Re: Thanking Judge for patience (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 08/17/1999
Proceedings: Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held May 6 and 7, 1999.
Date: 07/12/1999
Proceedings: Respondents` Joint Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 07/12/1999
Proceedings: (Clark Stillwell) Recommended Order (for judge signature) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 07/08/1999
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Hall Re: Closing Arguments; Letter to C. Stillwell, M. Lytle from A. Baumann Re: Transcript (filed via facsimile).
Date: 07/07/1999
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. Spence Re: Thanking LJS for being patience and explaning the proper procedures; Letter to LJS from R. & J. Hall Re: Withlocoochee River (filed via facsimile).
Date: 06/21/1999
Proceedings: (3 Volumes) Transcript ; Notice of Filing filed.
Date: 05/17/1999
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Carlson Re: Hearing on 5/6/99 filed.
Date: 05/06/1999
Proceedings: Hearing Held May 6-7 only; see case file for applicable time frames.
Date: 05/04/1999
Proceedings: Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association`s Exhibit and Witness list w/cover letter (filed via facsimile).
Date: 05/04/1999
Proceedings: Respondents` Joint Motion to Dismiss Petitioners Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association and Guy Marwick for Lack of Standing filed.
Date: 05/04/1999
Proceedings: (M. Lytle, A. Baumann, C. Stillwell, T. Spence, R. Hall, J. Hall) Prehearing Stipulation (filed via facsimile).
Date: 04/09/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Second Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Rietenbach filed.
Date: 04/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Amended Motion to Compel and for Other Relief filed.
Date: 04/06/1999
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Sartin from J. Babiarz (re: notification of personal representative; cc: location may enclosed) filed.
Date: 04/05/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Motion to Compel and for Other Relief filed.
Date: 02/23/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for May 5-7, 1999; 9:30am; Inverness)
Date: 02/23/1999
Proceedings: Order of Prehearing Instructions sent out.
Date: 02/12/1999
Proceedings: (DEP) 6/Amended Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Petitioners Thomas Spence and Norma L. Spence rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First set of Interrogatories to Petitioners Thomas Spence and Normal L. Spence rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Petitioners Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Reitenbach rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Reitenbach rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Petitioners Judith K. Hall and Russell D. Hall rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners` Judith K. Hall and Russell D. Hall rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Peter Guy Marwick filed.
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner Guy Marwick rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Petitioner Peter A. Grant rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s first Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner Peter A. Grant rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions to Petitioners Janifer Carlsonand Richard Carlson rec`d
Date: 02/08/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners Janifer Carlson and Richard Carlson rec`d
Date: 02/01/1999
Proceedings: (DEP) (2) Request for Production; (2) Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum; (4) Notice of Taking Deposition rec`d
Date: 01/14/1999
Proceedings: (SWFWMD) Supplemental Response to Order (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/29/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 12/22/1998
Proceedings: (Respondent) Response to Order filed.
Date: 12/21/1998
Proceedings: (DEP) Report to Administrative Law Judge (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/21/1998
Proceedings: Letter to DOAH from N. Spence (RE: response to continuance) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/17/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from D. Rietenbach Re: Not able to attend meeting between 3/15 until 3/31 filed.
Date: 12/11/1998
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance sent out. (12/7/98 hearing cancelled; parties to file unavailable hearing dates by 12/23/98)
Date: 12/11/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from G. Marwick Re: Response to letter from A. Baumahn on12/9/98 filed.
Date: 12/08/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from C. Stillwell Re: Days for hearing filed.
Date: 12/02/1998
Proceedings: (Respondent) Response in Opposition to Pro Se Petitioners` Motion for Continuance Immediately Prior to Final Hearing (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/02/1998
Proceedings: (DEP) Filing Omitted Pages to Exhibit A (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/02/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Filing Affidavit of Kirby B. Green, III; (Kirby B. Green III) Affidavit (filed via facsimile).
Date: 11/20/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. Spence (RE: request for extension) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 11/20/1998
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Motion for a Prehearing Order (filed via facsimile).
Date: 11/19/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from G. Marwick (RE: request for continuance) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 11/09/1998
Proceedings: (DEP) Amended Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Date: 10/22/1998
Proceedings: (DEP) Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Date: 09/23/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association, Inc.`s Response to Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Request for Admissions filed.
Date: 08/20/1998
Proceedings: Respondent Southwest Florida Water management district`s Request for Admissions to Petitioner Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association, Inc. filed.
Date: 08/20/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association, Inc. filed.
Date: 08/20/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent Southwest Florida Water Management District`s Answers to Petitioner Big Blue Springs Property Owners` Association, Inc.`s First Set of Interrogatories filed.
Date: 08/18/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Department of Environmental Protection`s Answers to Petitioner`s Trial Interrogatories filed.
Date: 07/31/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for Dec. 7-9, 1998; 9:30am; Inverness)
Date: 07/17/1998
Proceedings: Respondents` Joint Status Report filed.
Date: 07/17/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Hall (RE: available dates) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 07/14/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 07/07/1998
Proceedings: Ninth Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report & unavailable hearing dates by 7/15/98)
Date: 07/07/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from P. Grant (RE: advising the Judge that they will continue to move forward with mediation) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 06/18/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 06/18/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Hall (RE: response to order) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 03/20/1998
Proceedings: Eighth Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 6/15/98)
Date: 03/12/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 03/11/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Carlson Re: Requesting an extension on the date for Settlement filed.
Date: 03/09/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. Spence Re: No decision filed.
Date: 03/06/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Hall Re: Dispute over Big Blue Spring Dike filed.
Date: 02/20/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from C. Stillwell Re: Filing status reports with Agency Clerk; (3) Status Report filed.
Date: 02/04/1998
Proceedings: Seventh Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 3/10/98)
Date: 01/26/1998
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Sartin from N. Spence (re: status report) filed.
Date: 01/23/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Carlson Re: Not in agreement with State`s plan filed.
Date: 01/23/1998
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from R. Hall Re: No decision has been made regarding the Big Blue Spring filed.
Date: 12/16/1997
Proceedings: Sixth Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 1/26/98)
Date: 12/16/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from D. Rietenbach Re: No successful compromise or agreement filed.
Date: 12/05/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from J. Carlson Re: Not in agreement with state`s plan filed.
Date: 12/04/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. & T. Spence Re: No agreement regarding little spring filed.
Date: 09/30/1997
Proceedings: Fifth Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 12/8/97)
Date: 09/15/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 09/10/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. & T. Spence Re: Appeal for rehearing before the State Cabinet filed.
Date: 09/10/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from Thomas Spence (RE: request for rehearing) (filed via facsimile).
Date: 09/08/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from R. Hall Re: Response to Fourth Order of Abeyance; Letter to Cabinet Members from R Hall Re: Big Blue Springs filed.
Date: 07/16/1997
Proceedings: Fourth Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 9/8/97)
Date: 06/27/1997
Proceedings: (SWFWMD) Status Report (filed via facsimile).
Date: 06/23/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. Spence Re: Status Report filed.
Date: 05/15/1997
Proceedings: Third Order of Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 6/30/97)
Date: 05/05/1997
Proceedings: Memo to LJS from H. Goodheart Re: Interim Mediation Report filed.
Date: 04/28/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. & T. Spence Re: Filing an extension filed.
Date: 04/21/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from R. & J. Hall Re: Big Blue Spring Citrus County filed.
Date: 03/18/1997
Proceedings: Second Order of Abeyance sent out.
Date: 03/13/1997
Proceedings: (SWFWMD) Supplemental Status Report filed.
Date: 02/18/1997
Proceedings: Letter to LJS from N. & T. Spence Re: Meeting on 3/5/97 (for case no. 96-5886) filed.
Date: 01/02/1997
Proceedings: Order Granting Motion for Consolidation and Abatement of Proceeding sent out. (Consolidated cases are: 96-5883 through 96-5889)
Date: 12/18/1996
Proceedings: Initial Order issued.
Date: 12/13/1996
Proceedings: Agency referral letter; Notice of Referral and Motion for Consolidation and Abatement of Proceeding (96-5883 through 96-5889); Petition for Administrative Hearing; Agency action letter; CC: Warranty Deed filed.

Case Information

Judge:
LARRY J. SARTIN
Date Filed:
12/13/1996
Date Assignment:
12/18/1996
Last Docket Entry:
11/01/1999
Location:
Inverness, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Related DOAH Cases(s) (7):

Related Florida Statute(s) (2):

Related Florida Rule(s) (5):