Laserfiche WebLink
Under the LDRs, the Board is now to consider the administrative permit application and the Planning <br />and Zoning Commission's decision to approve the application (see attachment 94). The Board may <br />uphold or overturn the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision. In doing so, the Board may <br />approve, approve with conditions, or deny the administrative permit application. <br />The county's land development regulations (LDRs} provide criteria for the Boazd to use in its revie a• <br />of the appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision on the administrative permit <br />application. These criteria, based on LDR section 902.07 (4) and (5) (see attachment #4), are as <br />follows: <br />(1) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to follow the appropriate revie�. <br />procedures? <br />(2) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission act in an arbitrary or capricious manner" <br />(3) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to consider adequately the effects oI' <br />the proposed development upon surrounding properties, traffic circulation or public <br />health, safety and welfare? <br />(4) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to evaluate the application with <br />respect to the comprehensive plan and land development regulations of Indian River <br />County? <br />The Board is to consider each of these criteria and make findings in all 4 areas addressed by the <br />criteria. Staff's analysis of the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision in regard to the 4 <br />criteria, and the appeal letter "response", are as follows: <br />(I) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to foliow the appropriate review <br />procedures? <br />— Appeal Letter Response: The appeal letter raises no objections to the <br />procedures followed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, although the <br />appeal letter (see attachment #1) implies that the applicant did not adequately <br />respond to certain questions and issues raised at the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission meeting. <br />— Staff's Response: The Planning and Zoning Commission did not fail in <br />regard to following appropriate review procedures. Although the application <br />request did not require a public hearing, the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission allowed the appellant to provide input at the November 9`h <br />meeting. Thus, the Commission followed procedures and accommodated <br />input from the appellant. <br />(2) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission act in an <br />arbitrary or capricious manner? <br />— Appeal Letter Response: <br />The appeal letter does not allege that the Planning <br />and Zoning Commission acted arbitrarily or capriciously. <br />— Staff's Response: <br />The Planning and Zoning Commission did not act <br />arbitrarily or capriciously but acted in accordance with the LDRs that are <br />applicable to the application request. <br />December 12, 2000 <br />I1 R 11 <br />