2/5/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

After receiving the submittal, staff determined that the application request was incomplete, lacking an environmental survey (survey of wetlands areas, vegetation and soil types, and surface water and water table characteristics) and that the submittal could not be routed for staff review until it was made complete. Although the applicant asserted in writing that the submittal was complete and had to be processed for review, staff re -asserted its position in writing that the application was incomplete and could not be reviewed without a complete environmental survey. At its meeting of September 11, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the new LDRs. On October 2, 1990, staff began sending notices to all design professionals (architects, engineers) stating that only complete applications submitted prior to 5:00 p.m. October 10, 1990 would be reviewed under the old LDRs. Any application or submittals received after that date would be reviewed under the new LDR's. On October 30, 1990, the applicant furnished staff with an environmental survey in an attempt to complete the submittal received on September 11, 1990. Since this additional material was received after October 10, 1990, the applicant was informed in writing that the new LDRs apply to his submittal as well as any other complete applications received after staff's October 10th grace period deadline. The applicant was then informed that he would need to submit all materials required under the new LDRs for any development request. Because no "wetlands designation waiver" is allowed under the new LDRs, the appellant was also informed that no waiver could be processed under the new LDRs. The applicant appealed staff's decision to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Because the Planning and Zoning Commission upheld staff's decisions and denied the appeal, the appellant is now appealing the Planning and Zoning Commission decision. The Board of County Commissioners is now to consider and approve (affirm) or deny (overturn) the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission that was previously described in this report. ALTERNATIVES & ANALYSIS Contested Issues Three issues are being contested, and they are as follows: 1. *Staff's right to reject (not review) an incomplete application submittal. 2. *Staff's determination that the application was incomplete and lacked a complete environmental survey that was required to be submitted prior to the actual review of the application. 3. Staff's right to apply a general grace period deadline to the request and to now apply the new LDRs to the request. *Note: Staff and the appellant both agree that issues #1 and #2 above relate to the September 10th submittal and that the old LDRs applied to the September 10th submittal. Issue #1: Staff's Right to Reject an Incomplete Application. The appellant contends that under Section 23.1 (site plan ordinance section) of the old LDRs staff does not have the right to find applications incomplete and reject (not review) submittals. It is the applicant's contention that staff must process for review all submittals and allow the TRC to note discrepancies in its discrepancy letters. Staff's interpretation, upheld by the Board 16 M M