Laserfiche WebLink
80OX 92 Fqf. 789 <br />Director Keating felt that Attorney Vitunac may want to <br />address the quasi-judicial question. <br />TO: <br />FROM: <br />DATE: <br />RE: <br />Board of County Commissioners <br />Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney <br />July 6, 1994 <br />Standard of Review for Site Plan Appeal <br />I have been asked to state briefly the legal prerogatives of the Board <br />of County Commissioners regarding site plan appeals under the Indian <br />River County Code and State law and in partiedlar regarding the Publix <br />site plan for The Moorings, which is under appeal. <br />SUMMARY OF SITE PLAN REVIEW <br />The site plan review requirements are given in Section 914.15 of the <br />Code and can be reduced to the following three inquiries, each of which <br />will be discussed in turn: <br />1. Is the use allowed by the zoning code? <br />By the time the Publix site plan appeal is heard, the Board of County <br />Commissioners may have resolved the issue whether a "supermarket" is <br />within the ambit of the term "grocery store" and hence allowed in a CL <br />zone. If the use is not allowed, the site plan must be rejected. If <br />the use is allowed, the Board.must next determine if the site plan meets <br />the objectively determinable standards. <br />2. Are all objectively determinable standards met? <br />These standards are specifically enumerated in the code and can be <br />objectively determined. By the time this appeal is heard the County <br />staff and- the Planning and Zoning Commission may have made a <br />recommendation for approval or not based on the objectively determinable <br />standards issues. County policy is to have the applicant re -work the <br />site plan until the County staff finds that all requirements are in <br />order. Therefore, it: is not expected that objectively determinable <br />standards requirements will be a decisional issue. However, if they do <br />become an issue the burden of proof is on the applicant to present <br />competent, substantial evidence showing compliance with each objectively <br />determinable standards requirement. This review by the BCC is quasi- <br />judicial. This means that, once unrebutted proof hap been made showing <br />compliance with each requirement of the Code, the Board is required to <br />grant the permit applied for, at least in so far as this objectively <br />determinable standards issue is concerned. <br />3. Is the site plan consistent with the comprehensive plan? <br />State law requires that all land use decisions be consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan. There are no'exceptions. A site plan approval is <br />such a land,use decision. <br />How does Indian River County ensure that its site plan decisions are <br />consistent with the comprehensive plan? <br />15 <br />July 12, 1994 <br />