Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/07/1997

Home

Z.B. December 15, 1996 -- Page 7 owners was at the meeting where the moratorium was first discussed. This was more than enough to alert Oblin to the moratorium. Timber Ridge Homes at Brookhaven Inc. v. State of New York, 637N. Y.S. 2d 179 (1996). Lujan Home Builders Inc. v. Town of Orangetown, 568 N. ES. 2d 850 (1- 991). Landfill -- Developer says its proposal did not get right type of hearing City Environmental Services Landfill Inc. of Florida v. Holmes County, 677 $o. 2d 1-327 (Florida) I_996 City Environmental Services Landfill Inc. wanted to operate a landfill on property it owned in Holmes County, Fla. The property included the former county landfill, which had been ordered closed. The county agreed the com- pany would be allowed to operate a new landfill on the site if it got the neces- sary permits and handled closure of the old landfill. The county adopted a comprehensive land use plan. Landfills were not a land use category, and the plan did not address landfill location or operation. The plan designated the company's property for "public/semi-public/educa- tional'' use. The company got an environmental permit for a regional landfill, but the- county attorney told the company it also needed a county development per- mit. When the company applied for the permit, it was told it also had to get the comprehensive plan amended to specify sanitary landfill as a use for the site. The county said the company's Permit application was on hold. The company appealed to the county planning commission, claiming the comprehensive plan aIlowed landfills on the site. The company pointed out that the plan designated the old landfill site for public use and the County Land Development Code defined "public facilities and services" to include solid waste. Following negotiations, the company dropped its appeal and had a con-' ference with the county. At the conference, the company was told to submit proposed plan amendments to create a land use category for "landfill" with policies and standards to govern location, performance standards and other matters. The company submitted a proposal to add a new land use category for "landfill." (It had first submitted, then withdrawn, a proposal that did not comply with the instructions from the conference.) The new category could be imposed on a parcel only by using the formal plan amendment process. A parcel with the new category could be used only for a solid waste disposal facility or ancillary uses. The category "landfill" would be added to the Iand use map. The county told the company the proposed amendments were policy formu- lation, so hearings on the proposal would be conducted as legislative proceed- ings. This meant members of the public could speak and there would not be