The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)
|
||||||
|
. . . ." § 772.13(a). . . . ." § 772.13(h). . . .
. . . .” § 772.13(a). . . . .” § 772.13(g). . . . .” § 772.13(h). . . . measures which are feasible and reasonable, and which are likely to be incorporated in the project.” § 772.13 . . .
. . . . §§ 772.5(g), 772.11(c), 772.13(c); 23 C.F.R. Part 772, Table 1. . . . constructing noise barriers or acquiring property to create a “buffer zone.” 23 C.F.R. § § 772.5, 772.9, 772.13 . . . construction of noise barriers or acquisition of property to create a buffer zone). 23 C.F.R. §§ 772.11(c), 772.13 . . .
. . . . § 772.11(c), which states, “If a noise impact is identified, the abatement measures listed in § 772.13 . . . specific measures, which are not listed among the recommended noise abatement measures in 23 C.F.R. § 772.13 . . .
. . . . §§ 772.13 & 772.15 (1977); 23 C.F.R. §§ 772.3 & 772.4 (1973). . . . The Association also challenged the final sentence of regulation 772.13(b), which states that funding . . . We conclude that the challenged portion of regulation 772.13 is not retroactive. . . . In this case, the application of regulation 772.13 is triggered by events occurring after its effective . . . We conclude that regulation 772.13 is not retroactive and that the FHWA properly applied the regulation . . .
. . . As a result of this delinquency defendants owe the Fund $93,-772.13 (cplt. . . .
. . . . § 772.13(b) (1981), and by noting that Plaintiffs have provided no proof that any planned developments . . . of the project, they are to be treated as developed lands, i.e., the design noise levels listed in § 772.13 . . . F, § 3.10.04, p. 3.10/2, which, under 23 C.F.R. § 772.13(b) are described as categories for developed . . .