7/17/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

elements and be approved, but that review still has to be gone through. It is no longer a matter of right. A development order cannot be issued unless you determine it is consistent with the Comp Plan. Attorney O'Haire stated that he agrees with what Attorney Collins is saying completely. There is no argument or dispute. Continuing, Attorney Collins advised that the Fourth District Court of Appeals has held that it is not just the land use element that it must be consistent with. You cannot simply look at the color of the map and say, "You are consistent with our Comp Plan." You have to look at all the elements of the Comp Plan, and it is very likely that there will be competing priorities, objectives, and policies in the different elements of the Comp Plan. The court stated that it is the role of the County Commission to abide by all the elements and it is up to the Commission to determine what priorities to assign to these competing policies. In conclusion, Attorney Collins summarized that this is essentially our position on consistency and the ability to have a subdivision approved as a matter of right. It is a matter of right only if you are consistent with the plan and that determination still has to be made. Attorney O'Haire suggested that a single-family development under any view, goal or policy of the Comp Plan would be consistent, because you would have to be going off a very deep end to say that a single-family plat of this property would not be consistent. It would be consistent, but in terms of preserving the ecological and environmental well-being of the property, you would not have the tools available that you have in a PRD or a multi -family development due to the strengths in your Planning Dept. to control hoW.the property is to be developed. We all know how single-family plans get developed. You lay things out in a grid, more or less, and you may have curving 32 nY"r cad. ,�