Fort Walton Beach Council agenda — 04-11-06 Workshop — reading text

16> 2006 Thomson/ West. No Claim to Orig. U. S. Govt. Works. 629 So.2d 161 Page 2 629 So.2d 161, 18 Fla. L.Weekly D2117 Cite as: 629 So. 2d 161) Landowner has initial burden to demonstrate that his requirement that office buildings be designed with petition for use of privately owned lands complies residential scale and character, and limit on height of with reasonable procedural requirements of zoning office structures to 35 feet. West' s F. S. A. Const. Art. ordinance and that proposed use is consistent with. LU; U. S. CA. Const. Amends. 5, H. applicable comprehensive zoning plan, after which landowner is presumptively entitled to desired use of J]l Administrative Law and Procedure 15A property unless governmental agency proves by clear 484. 1 and convincing evidence that specifically stated public necessity requires more restrictive use, which 15A Administrative Law and Procedure shifts burden back to landowner to assert and prove 15AIV Powers and Proceedings of Administrative that more restrictive land use is taking of property for Agencies, Officers and Agents which landowner is constitutionally entitled to 15AIV(D)Hearings and Adjudications compensation. West' s F. S. A. Const. Art. I. &2; 15Ak484 Findings V. S. C. A. Const.Amends. 5, H. 15Ak484. 1 k. In General. Most Cited Cases IQl Zoning and Planning 414 €=" 609 Administrative Law and Procedure 15A C::::> 488 414 Zoning and Planning 414X Judicial Review or Relief 15A Administrative Law and Procedure 414 X( C) Scope of Review 15AIV Powers and Proceedings of Administrative 414X( C) 1 In General Agencies, Officers and Agents 414k608 Arbitrary, Capricious, or 15AIV(D) Hearings and Adjudications Unreasonable Action 15Ak488 k. Conclusions. Most Cited Cases 414k609 k. Regulations. Most Cited Neither agency nor reviewing court is bound by Cases labels affixed by hearing officer to findings of fact Changes to comprehensive zoning plan to and conclusions of law, although agency may not accommodate development, but with additional disregard hearing officer' s findings of fact by simply conditions on development, affected large portion of recharacterizing finding as conclusion of law. West' s public and was legislative in character and, thus, b) F. S. A. & 120. 57( 1)( lO. standard of review was limited to detennining whether rezoning with challenged conditions was unreasonable and arbitrary. 162 Miranda F. Fitzgerald and Karen M. Connell of Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, P. A., Orlando, for ill Eminent Domain 148 ~ 2. 10( 6) appe lIant. Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Kathleen E. 148 Eminent Domain Moore, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee 1481 Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Com' n. 148k2 What Constitutes a Taking; Police and Joel D. Prinsell, Asst. County Atty., Orlando, and Other Powers Distinguished Herbert A. Langston. Jr., City Atty., Maitland, for 148k2. 10 Zoning, Planning, or Land Use; appellees Orange County, and City of Maitland. Building Codes 148k2. 1O( 4) Zoning and Pennits W. SHARP, Judge. 148k2. 10( 6) k. Particular Cases. Most Battaglia Properties, Ltd. appeals from a final Cited Cases administrative order of the Florida Land and Water Fonnerly 148k2( 1.2)) Adjudicatory Commission which approved a Evidence established that conditions imposed on development order pertaining to Battaglia' s property development by changes comprehensive plan to known as " Lakepointe." Battaglia contends that were reasonable and not arbitrary and, thus, did not certain conditions in the imposed on the order unconstitutionally take property by depriving any Lakepointe development unduly restrictive and are reasonable economically viable use; rezoning violate constitutional provisions protecting private FNl allowed considerably broader and more economically property. The record below demonstrates that the conditions in the development order are designed to advantageous options to landowner, even with conditions of no freestanding commercial use, limit make the project compatible with surrounding on office structures to 10, 000 square feet per acre, residential areas, and thus hannonious and consistent Q 2006 Thomson/ West. No Claim to Orig. U. S. Govt. Works. 629 So. 2d 161 Page 3 629 So.2d 16 I, 18 Fla. L. Weekly 02 I 17 Cite as: 629 So. 2d ] 61) with the Orange County Growth Management Policy accommodate the development and approved the and the City of Maitland' s Growth Management necessary rezoning from R- IAA to PD. The Board Plans, for those surrounding areas. Thus, the also imposed certain conditions for the project, conditions imposed by the order are not arbitrary or including prohibiting freestanding commercial unreasonable. Accordingly, we affirm. structures, limiting the height of office buildings to thirty- five feet, requiring that the design of the office buildings be of a " residential scale and character," FN I. U. S. Const.Amend. V and XIV; Art. and limiting office structures to 1 0, 000 square feet I. ~ 2. Fla. Const. per acre. This proceeding began when Battaglia Properties, Battaglia filed a notice of appeal from the Ltd. sought to develop Lakepointe, a vacant tract of development order with the Florida Land and Water land of about 120 acres located in unincorporated Adjudicatory Commission. The appeal was referred Orange County. The property is surrounded by the to a hearing officer who conducted a four- day de City of Maitland on three sides. Interstate 4, a major novo hearing. The hearing officer recommended interstate highway, lies about one quarter of a mile to approval of the development order but increased the the West. Maitland Boulevard, a four- lane highway maximum height for office buildings in parcel 5 from running east to west, bisects the property into thirty- five to fifty feet. She upheld the County' s northern and southern portions. elimination of freestanding commercial use, the limitation on office square footage, and continued the The southern portion of the property was the subject use of the term " residential scale and character" for of a prior zoning proceeding. Battaglia' planned s the design of office buildings. After considering the development ultimately upheld by this court, was recommended order exceptions filed by the and primarily on jurisdictional grounds. Battavlia Fruit parties, the Commission approved the recommended Comoanv v. City of Maitland. 530 So. 2d 940 ( Fla. 5th order but restricted the height in all parcels to thirty- DCA ), rev. denied, 537 So. 2d 568 ( Fla. I Both 988), five feet. the southern and portions of larger northern Lakepointe had to be included in Battaglia' s current On appeal to this court, Battaglia objects to the request filed with the East Central Florida Regional following conditions in the development order which Planning Council because the magnitude of the apply primarily to the northern portion of the project: FN_ project made it one of regional impact or a " DRI." 1) elimination of freestanding commercial use and the requirement that commercial use