02/12/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- • i • • • ro s ecific land develo•ment regulationfic re ] e address effects on surrounding •ro•ernes traffic circulation and welfarel • • erlv a 1 the criteria of n a including those s •• • • •• licable ulations that ublic health safety (d) Did the reviewing official or commission base its decision on erroneous or incorrect infoiniation as related to an a licable land develo•ment re•ulahon re uirement? - • • •• • •• -- •e. • :- • - • • • - • • • • - �• • • -w • • Director Boling advised of a correction on the PZC vote concerning this matter; it was not 6-0 as stated in the memorandum, but was in fact 5-1. Vice Chairman Tippin asked if the Commissioners had any questions of staff; there were none. Vice Chairtnan Tippin opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to be heard in this matter. Ralph Evans, 1420 Shorelands Drive West, was pleased this ordinance was being proposed but felt that more needed to be done. To accompany his remarks, he gave the Commissioners handouts ofFlorida Supreme Court decisions (copies on file with the backup of the meeting) on Brevard County v Jack R. Snyder and Broward County v GB V International, Ltd He expounded on sections of each handout to support his comments for changing how appeals are handled in Indian River County. He suggested the Board should consider that the Supreme Court of Florida is looking uniform administration of the law. He outlined the procedures for development here in Indian River County. He submitted there is a certain burden ofproof which shifts between a landowner and county government. When corning into an appeal hearing, the staff and the landowner have reached an agreement and then it comes to a hearing for public comment. In these hearings, one of the Court's February 12, 2002 34 p r' z 0