NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT XIP TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) Case No. 2D17-3718 ASCEND GLOBAL SERVICES, LLC, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 15, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; Alane C. Laboda, Judge. John C. Webb of John Webb Legal Group, P.L., Fort Myers, for Appellant. Louis D. D'Agostino of Cheffy Passidomo, P.A., Naples; and Richard Cimino ..

The issue in this case is whether the comprehensive plan and subsequent remedial plan amendments adopted by Lake County are "in compliance" pursuant to Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.).The comprehensive plan is in compliance although failure to challenge cumulative notice is also fatal to petitioners' case.

The issue in this case is whether the development order issued by Polk County for Robert Crowder's development known as Paradise Country Estates complies with Chapter 380, Fla. Stat. (1991). The Department of Community Affairs' Petition for Appeal of Development Order (the DCA Petition) alleges that the development order is contrary to Polk County's 1985 comprehensive plan for the following reasons: Paragraph 11 of the DCA Petition alleges that the development order is contrary to the provisions of Policy 9, Objective III, "Natural Resources," of the Land Use Element (LUE) of the 1985 Plan. Policy 9 states: "Structures should be placed in a manner which will not adversely affect the natural flow regime and which will not reduce the recharge capabilities." Paragraph 12 of the DCA Petition alleges that the development order is contrary to the provisions of Policy 10, Objective III, "Natural Resources," of the LUE. Policy 10 states: "Placement of structures shall be consistent with sound flood plain management practices such as compliance with the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973." Paragraph 13 of the DCA Petition alleges that the development order is contrary to the provisions of Policy 11, Objective III, "Natural Resources," of the LUE and Policies 9 and 10 of the "Water Resource Objective" of the Conservation Element of the Plan. Respectively, these policies state: 11. Groundwater withdrawal should not exceed the safe yield per acre as determined by Water Management Districts or successor agencies.DO for 356 unit subdivision on 1280 acres in Green Swamp ACSC; OSDS (septic systems) didn't consider density and intensity; Vs compensation plan and Land Development Regions.

The information-gathering hearing was convened for the purpose of determining the impact of Lake County’s Order denying a rezoning application (“Rezoning”) for the Lake Nellie Crossing Planned Unit Development, Lake County Case No. RZ-20-39-23 (“PUD”), whether the denial of the rezoning application was unreasonable or unfairly burdened the real property subject to Petitioner’s rezoning application, and whether some modification of Petitioner’s proposed use of the property or adjustment to the denial of the rezoning application could be reached.Petitioner demonstrated that denial of the Rezoning Application would be unreasonable or would unfairly burden the use of the owners' property.