welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. Gary Kenneth Hunter, Jr.
Gary Kenneth Hunter, Jr.
Gary Kenneth Hunter, Jr.
Visitors: 35
0
Bar #949779(FL)     License for 33 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Gary Kenneth Hunter, Jr.? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

17-005082  MOORE POND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; AND OX BOTTOM MANOR COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC. vs GOLDEN OAK LAND GROUP, LLC; AND LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 18, 2017
The issue to be determined in this case is whether the Leon County Development Review Committee’s preliminary conditional approval of a site and development plan for the Brookside Village Residential Subdivision is consistent with the Tallahassee-Leon County 2030 Comprehensive Plan (“Comp Plan”) and the Leon County Land Development Code (“Code”).Petitioners failed to prove the proposed residential development was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan of Land Development Code provisions that require compatibility.
14-005657GM  ALERTS OF PBC, INC., PATRICIA D. CURRY, ROBERT SCHUTZER, AND KAREN SCHUTZER vs PALM BEACH COUNTY  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 26, 2014
The issue to be determined in this case is whether the amendments to the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan (“the Comp Plan”) adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County by Ordinance No. 14-030 (“Proposed Amendments”) are “in compliance,” as that term is defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2014).Palm Beach County's determination that the proposed amendments to its comprehensive plan are in compliance is fairly debatable.
11-000584GM  DIANE BROWN vs BAY COUNTY  (2011)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 07, 2011
The issue to be determined in this case is whether Amendment 10-01A to the Bay County Comprehensive Plan (“the Plan Amendment”), adopted by Ordinance 10-22, is “in compliance,” as that term is defined in section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes.1Petitioner failed to prove beyond fair debate that the Bay County's comprehensive plan amendment was not in compliance.
09-003488RP  FLORIDA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC., FLORIDA LAND COUNCIL, INC., AND FLORIDA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, FLORIDA NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS vs DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 24, 2009
The issue is whether proposed rules 9J-5.026(3)(d), (7)(b), (7)(c)4. and 6., (8)(a), (9)(a)3., 6., 18., and 19., and 9J- 11.023(2), (4), and (5), and existing Florida Administrative Code Rule 9J-5.003(80) are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority for the reasons alleged in the Petition for Administrative Hearing to Challenge Proposed Amendments to Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-11, F.A.C. and to Challenge Existing Rule 9J-5.003(80) (Petition).1Proposed rules 9J-5.026 and 9J-11.023 and existing Rule 9J-5.003(80) are not invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority.
06-004544GM  1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, INC.; AND ROSA DURANDO vs PALM BEACH COUNTY AND DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS  (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 13, 2006
The issues in this case are whether the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan amendments which changed the future land use designations for a 97.55-acre parcel and a 26.23-acre parcel through the adoption, respectively, of Ordinance 2006-28 and Ordinance 2006-29, are “in compliance,” as that term is defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2007).1Two amendments to the Future Land Use Map of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan are not in compliance with state law because they create internal inconsistancies.
05-000921GM  HILDRETH COOPER vs CITY OF PANAMA CITY  (2005)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 10, 2005
The issue is whether the City of Panama City's small scale development amendment adopted by Ordinance No. 2055.1 on February 8, 2005, is in compliance.Proposed change in land use from mixed use to commercial is incompatible with the surrounding residential area and therefore is deemed not in compliance.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer