Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/06/2008

Home

Zoning Bulletin vested by the state constitution in zoning boards as coordinate branches of the government. The appeals court found that the adoption of minimum crite- ria by the county constituted a legislative function, and, although courts were authorized to interpret and declare the law, courts had no authority to direct a legislative body to enact legislation. Be- cause the appeals court could not grant the relief that the residents requested, the residents lacked standing. The appeals court noted that "[t]he only remedy available to [the residents was] to have the courts invalidate the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance that did not comply with the provisions of the state law," but if that happened, then there would be no re- quirement for an EIAat all; this remedy would not redress plain- tiffs.' alleged injuries. Because the appeals court agreed with the lower court's find- ing that the remedies that the residents sought were "unavailable and inappropriate," they could not establish a right to bring their claims in court. The decision to dismiss the case was affirmed. Permit-Developer misses initial deadline; permit is revoked " Claims zoning official assured it permit was 'okay' Citation: Clay County v. Kendale Land Development, Inc., 2007 WL 4244358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.lst Dist. 2007) FLORIDA (12/0S/07)-Kendale, an experienced land developer, began planning a project in June 2004 to develop 124 single-fam- ily home lots in the Clay County. In support of that project, the county issued a "Concurrency Reservation Certificate (CRC)." A CRC was defined by the county as "the official document is- sued by the county upon finding that an application for ... final development ... [would] not result in the reduction of the adopt- ed level of service standards for impacted potable water, sanitary sewer, parks and recreation, drainage, solid waste, transportation (roads) and mass transit facilities and services, as set forth in the [County's Comprehensive] Plan." Importantly, the ordinance provided further that an agreement to pay a "fair share" of the cost of road improvements might "serve as the functional equivalent of a CRC" when a project was unable to meet the concurrency requirements. The CRC issued to Kendale included language stating that a new CRC would be required if it did not obtain approval of all pre- liminary plats by December 2004 or if it failed to obtain approval of all final plats and acceptance of all roads and drainage by the 8 124 .'~: -', ) :i Ii " " !l H i! II q :j ': :1 I! !l i1 I ji ;I ': ji I' il ii ii !I !i '1 'I Ii 'I " I! ii Ii :! \ i; ) II ,I l1 !! i , !