1/16/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ANALYSIS • The county ' s land development regulations (LDRs) provide criteria for the Board to use in its revie of the appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission ' s decision on the site plan application . These criteria , based on LDR section 902 . 07 ( see attachment #5 ) , are as follows : ( 1 ) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to follow the appropriate review procedures ? (2 ) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission act in an arbitrary or capricious manner? ( 3 ) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to consider adequately the effects of the proposed development upon surrounding properties, traffic circulation or public health, safety and welfare? (4) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to evaluate the application with respect to the comprehensive plan and land development regulations of Indian River County? The Board is to consider each of these criteria and make findings in all 4 areas addressed by the criteria. Staffs analysis of the Planning and Zoning Commission ' s decision in regard to the 4 criteria is as follows : ( 1 ) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to follow the appropriate review procedures? The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the application at a regularly scheduled meeting, heard continents from staff and all interested parties, and had lengthy discussion before making a decision . The motion was properly made, and a vote was taken as reflected in the meeting minutes ( see attachment #2 ) . In addition, proper timeframes and procedures have been followed regarding the appeal . Procedurally, the Commission appears to have conducted an appropriate review of the applications . (2) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission act in an arbitrary or capricious manner? - During consideration of the site plan application , the Planning and Zoning Commission questioned the staff attorney as to matters of law and questioned the applicant ' s engineer as to matters of fact . In response to questions , the staff attorney indicated that the Planning and Zoning Commission could look at specific coastal properties on a case by case basis , but also indicated that the county did not have the data and analysis or expertise to determine a new line of prohibition . In questioning the applicant ' s engineer and the county ' s coastal engineer, the Commission inquired as to coastal erosion in the area, including the DEP ' s method for determining how far seaward of the 1987 CCCL . a structure is generally allowed to extend, setbacks used for development within the Town of Orchid and Windsor, and methods of construction used in such coastal locations . Some Planning and Zoning Commissioners stated at the end of the discussion that no one could present evidence that the project failed to meet the LDRs, while other commissioners JANUARY 16 , 2001 0 PG 739 - 25 -