02/12/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Another proposed change would eliminate a comprehensive plan policy review component of the general appeals review criteria. Appeals are to be narrowly focused on the application of land development regulations which are the mechanism for implementing comprehensive plan policies Therefore, matters under appeal must be reviewed for compliance with the land development regulations, which are themselves required to be consistent with the comprehensive plan, rather than for compliance with general policies. The proposed amendment deletes the comprehensive plan consistency review criterion and replaces it with a new criterion relating to erroneous or incorrect information. The new criterion would allow for decisions to be overturned on appeal if those decisions were based upon erroneous or incorrect information. Such a criterion would specifically allow for a correction of the "facts" or analysis related to compliance with applicable land development regulations. Also, section 5 of the proposed ordinance (see pg. 6 of attachment #4) separately addresses appeals of PZC decisions to deny rezoning requests. Such appeals are currently addressed in a separate section from general appeals and are not subject to the four findings/review criteria of section 902.07(4). Historically, such zoning appeals have been heard by the Board in the same manner as the Board hears rezoning requests that are recommended for approval by the PZC. To codify this historical practice, the proposed amendment specifies that appeals of PZC decisions to deny rezonings are to be heard by the Board "de novo" (like a new matter). In summary, the proposed changes to appeal requirements are necessary to comply with quasi- judicial review requirements. The modifications are supported by staff and the PZC, and will appropriately narrow the scope of general appeals to focus on whether or not the decision under appeal was based on the proper application of the appropriate LDRs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed ordinance to modify LDR appeal requirements. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Excerpt from PSAC Minutes of June 28, 2001 Meeting 2. Minutes from December 13, 2001 PZC Meeting 3. Minutes from January 24, 2002 PZC Meeting 4. Proposed LDR Amendment Ordinance Director Boling also reviewed the appeal criteria as on page 3 of the proposed ordinance in the backup for the meeting. (a) Did the reviewing official or commission fail to follow the appropriate review procedures s.ecified in the Land develo.ment re•ulations? (b) Did the reviewing official or commission : fail to ro.erly _ ._e and dimension recrulations for the res °•° a..lv the •� =- zoning districts (c) Did the reviewing official or commission fail to February 12, 2002 e 41. a• a - - --' • 4111 • 33 • :: ell •: - • • - - • g 2 i b ective • 4 fi