Laserfiche WebLink
M <br />elements of the plan were adopted <br />pursuant to the statutory mandates. of <br />Chapter 163. We cannot agree that the <br />land use plan Is the sole, controlling <br />document with which subsequent plan <br />elements had to comply. On the <br />contrary, each subsequently adopted <br />element was designed to fulfill the <br />overall requirements and goal.s of the <br />statute, as the text of these elements <br />amply demonstrates.". <br />The court went on to state that there was a "statutorily <br />mandated obligation to adopt a comprehensive plan and abide <br />by all its elements." (Emphasis.added by the court.) <br />Despite the necessity to abide by all the plan elements, the <br />court stated *that "the legislative scheme calls for a more <br />flexible approach to the determination of -consistency" and <br />cited F.S. 163.3194(3)(a) (see page 1, paragraph 3). The <br />court further advised that "managing growth under a <br />comprehensive plan with such a wide array of elements may <br />Involve selecting between conflicting goals and priorities." <br />(502 So.2d 931 at 939) <br />CONCLUSION <br />The adoption of our new Comprehensive Plan will place a <br />greater burden on the Planning staff to evaluate all <br />development orders (rezonings, special exceptions, etc.) in <br />terms of whether or not these proposed developments are <br />consistent with and further the objectives and policies of <br />all the elements of the Comprehensive Plan. While placing a <br />greater burden on the Planning staff In the review of <br />development proposals, such expanded reviews will ensure <br />that the goals of the Comprehensive Planning and Land <br />Development Regulation Act are achieved and that the <br />community grows in a manner consistent with its adopted <br />plan, while at the same time allowing the Planning <br />Commission and the Board of County Commissioners discretion <br />In weighing the relative priorities and values which should <br />be assigned to any competing or conflicting policies. <br />WGC/nhm <br />cc: Board of County Commissioners <br />Planning and Zoning Commission <br />James E. Chandler - County Administrator <br />Planning Department Staff <br />38 80 Fr�GE U <br />L 111-11990 <br />