Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/06/2006

Home

Page 2 -- February 10, 2006 Ordinance-- City grants application under old zoning rules Claims developer's application grandfathered in under oM law Citation: Morningside Civic Association Inc. v. City of Miami Commission, Court of Appeal of Florida, 3rd Dist., No. 3D05-1381 (2005) FLORIDA ( 1 ~21/05) -- The City of M/ami granted a "major use spec/al permit" to Kubik LLC to begin a large development project. Momingside Civic Association, a citizen group, challenged the application, arguing that it was granted without taking into account new January 2004 amendments to the zoning code. It claimed that the application would have failed under the new amendments. Momingside sued, and the couri ruled in favor of Kubik. It found that Kubik's application could proceed under the old zoning regulations. Momingside appealed. DECISION: Reversed. The developer initially fried a complete application in fall 2003. It argued since it Submitted a complete application in 2003, the pre-January 2004 version of the ordinance was applicable. However, after the local planning advisory board recommended the appli- cation be denied, the developer made the decision to modify its proposal rather than pursuing the original proposal before the city comm/ssion. Ia January 2004, the new zoning amendments took effect. However, the modified application was submitted on Feb. 10, 2004. The city's zoning resolution stated "on Feb. 10, 2004 ... [the developer] submitted a complete application." By the terms of this resolution, the city treated the application as being complete on Feb. 10, 2004. Importantly, the zoning code ~andfathered in "any complete application for development fried prior to Jan. 1, 2004." Since the developer's application wasn't complete in the city's opinion, the January 2004 amendments were now applicable to its application. see also: Miami-Dado County v. Omnipoint HoMings Inc., 863 So.2d 195 (2O05). see also: City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 4]9 So.2d 624 (]982). Appeal-- County finds planned 10-home development doesn't fit area Believes it will cause stress on surrounding agricultural zone Citation: Nelson v. The County of De Kal& Appellate Court of Illinois, 2nd Dist., No. 2-05-0340 (2005) 11 J ,12'4OIS (1 ~20/05)- Nelson wanted to develop 10 residential lots on a wooded 30-acre parcel within an agncultural zone. Nelson applied to the County. of De Kalb for' the necessary perm/ts and 92 @ 2006 Qumtan Pualisging Group. Any reproouctton is proni~iteO. For more information please call (617) 542-004§.