Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/05/2002

Home

36 Page 8 --November 1'0, 2002 Z.B. was "compatible with the existing development in the area." The.staff, how- ever, determined that Mann's request was inconsistent wi'th the comprehensive policy plan (CPP) and recommended denying the request due to a lack of ad- equate school capacity. The planning and zoning commission held 'a public hearing on June 15, 2000, and denied the application. Mann fLled a timely appeal to the board of county commissioners. The board affzrmed the vote of the commission after a hearing. At the hearing, the county planner told the board the staff recommended the denial of rezoning because the lack of adequate school capacity made the. plan inconsistent with two parts of the CPP. He also stated he was concerned rezoning would estab- lish a precedent for other tracts to rezone. A school board member also noted the school for the proposed development was over capacity and there were no funds available to improve the facility or build a new one. Mann asked the court to review the decision, claim/ng the sole reason for the denial of the zoning request was the chairman's initiative, which had the effect of putting into place a de facto moratorium on development. Mann pointed to a memo sent to the board of county commissioners from the commissioner. The memo noted, if the rezoning would result in overcrowding of the schools, the staff would recommend denial of the request. Mann also argued the implementation of the initiative was arbitrary, dis- criminatory, and unreasonable. He contended a state law preempted any denial of a request based on school overcrowding. DECISION: Review denied, The court would not over'mm the board's decision to deny the rezoning. The denial of the rezoning request was not based on the chairman's initia- ~iv'e but on the board's own determination that the request would be inconsis- tent with other adopted policies. The board' observed the law's essential requirements because it had statu- tory. authority to deny the zoning re- quest based on the inconsistencies with the elements of the comprehen- sive policy plan. The plan's policy of timing development so that the infrastructure is in place for devel- opment was sufficiently specific to be considered. Citation: Mann vt Board of County Commissioner& Court of Appeal of Florida, 5th Dist., No. 5D0]~]741 (2002). see also: Franklin v. S.G.I. Limited, 728 So. 2d 1210 (1_999).