1/27/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M Attorney Henderson agreed that an ordinary citizen can attack action taken by the Commission or a lower agency on the grounds that procedural defects render the action invalid, but stated that the law requires special standing criteria for parties who want to challenge action taken by the Board in the nature of discretionary action and decisions. He further stated that although the Audubon Society has raised procedural questions, Florida Land Company would maintain that none of those procedures would lead to the conclusion that the action taken by the Zoning Commission was invalid. Attorney Henderson contended that the cases cited in his memo make it clear that the standing requirements to bring an appeal before this Board are the -same as they are before the Court, and a party with an "aggrieved interest" means a party must have special injury and interest in the subject matter of the decision. He pointed out that site plan approval is one of the only areas where the Planning & Zoning Commission has the right to take final action without review by the County Commission, and he felt if the Board wants to open the door and allow everyone within the county, to appeal site plan approvals, they would be opening a Pandora's box. Attorney Henderson then discussed scope of review and stated that, if the Commission should hold that the Audubon Society has standing to question the substance of the action taken, then he felt they must restrict their review as to whether substantial and competent evidence was presented before that Board. Attorney Henderson informed the Board that he has a verbatim transcript of the presentations made by Engineer James Beindorf and Biologist, Jim Thomas, at the December 17th meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission, and he wished this transcript to be made a part of the record. JAN 271992 45 a&OK. 8 PAGF 719