12/12/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(4) Did the Planning and Zoning Commission fail to evaluate the application with respect to the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs of Indian River County? — Appeal Letter Response.• The appeal letter indicates that the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision failed to apply LDR section 971.44(1) and that the project is a "blatant attempt to circumvent" the county LDRs by proposing a tower height that falls just below an allowable height threshold. The appeal letter states that the presence of a rural neighborhood and large daycare center (Maitland Farms) were factors not adequately considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in its decision to approve the application. — Staff's Response: The fact that the proposed tower height just slightly falls below an allowable height threshold demonstrates compliance with the LDRs rather than circumvention of county regulations. In regard to the 971.44(1) criteria, staffs report to the Planning and Zoning Commission (see attachment #3) demonstrates satisfaction of these criteria. Under the administrative permit regulations of section 971.04, the county may place reasonable conditions on the project to mitigate negative impacts. Such conditions can include buffering or lighting conditions. Although reasonable conditions may be attached to an approval, 971.04 does not allow the county to deny an administrative permit application that meets all applicable specific LDR requirements for the proposed use [e.g. 971.44(1)]. Because the subject application meets all of the applicable LDR requirements specific to the proposed commercial monopole telecommunication tower, the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to approve the application should be upheld. However, if the county demonstrates that the specific criteria -are inadequate for this particular site, then the Board has the authority, under its consideration of this appeal, to add reasonable conditions to the project approval to ensure compatibility (e.g. shielding of any required lighting, tower color, increased buffering for special screening effects, or tower use assurances). Staffs analysis is that the Planning and Zoning Commission decision was correct based upon a logical and straight forward application of the LDRs. t �►�►� ►�• �► Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Find that the Planing and Zoning Commission did not fail in regard to any of the 4 appeal review criteria, and 2. Uphold the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to grant administrative permit use approval for the proposed tower. .0 1. Letter of Appeal 2. Draft Minutes of the November 9, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 3. Staff's Project Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 4. LDRs Regarding Appeals 5. Tower Regulations [911.06 Table and 971.44(1)] 6. Administrative Permit Conditions and Safeguards [971.04] December 12, 2000 92 BKIIf�PG��22 c ��