 |
| This land use battle went back and forth like Forest Gump playing ping pong.....costing private citizens' time, legal fees, county staff time, and all kinds of time at BCC meetings....... |
County attorney Alison Rogers and her staff are to be commended.
They achieved a very nice win yesterday that ends---unequivocally, unambiguously, once and for all-and rather unceremoniously- a long running and expanding land use argument that essentially began with a disagreement between the county, one citizen, and one property owner that has bounced back and forth at meetings and online like Forest Gump's ping pong balls. (was that a run-on sentence?)
But now all of that is over. finally. finito!
The county was right and the pro se petitioner in this case was wrong, it's really pretty basic and that's the way this ends..
From the order:
"Contrary
to the
Petitioner's contention, the MU-S
FLU category's primary focus
is on
a mix of uses in a
suburban area. See Findings
of Fact
Nos. 6-8, above. Indeed, the FLU element of the Comp
Plan expresses a purpose and intent
to encourage
mixed- use development..Also,
the Petitioner's focus on
the differences between the
MU-S and Mixed-Use Urban (MU-U) FLU
categories in the Comp Plan was
misplaced. The
premise that the HC/LI zoning
district implements the MU-U
FLU category better than
it implements
the
MU-S FLU category was
not the issue to be
determined in this proceeding. Rather, it
was whether the Ordinance, as amended by the Remedial
Ordinance, amending the HC/LI zoning
district in the LDC
is consistent
with the Comp Plan..All other contentions
not specifically discussed
have been considered and rejected...Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, it
is
ORDERED that the
Ordinance, as amended by the
Remedial Ordinance, amending the
HC/LI zoning district in the
County LDC, is consistent
with the 2030 County Comp
Plan."
