The issues to be determined in this case are whether the land development regulations (LDRs) adopted by the City of Key West in Ordinance No. 12-16 are consistent with the City of Key West Comprehensive Plan and the Principles for Guiding Development for the City of Key West Area of Critical State Concern, and whether Final Order No. DEO-12-109 of the Department of Economic Opportunity ("DEO"), which approved the LDRs, is valid.Department of Economic Opportunity demonstrated that the proposed City of Key West land development regulations are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the principles for guiding development for the City of Key West Area of Critical State Concern.

The issue in this case is whether Monroe County Ordinance 004-1997, approved by a Final Order of the Department of Community Affairs, DCA Docket No. DCA97-280-FOI-GM, is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development set forth in Section 380.0552, Florida Statutes (1997)?Department of Community Affairs (DCA) proved that land development regulation, limiting area where residences can be rented for less than twenty-eight days, was consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development.

Whether Petitioner David Russ has standing to bring these proceedings.Failure to submit written comments destroys Petitioner's standing to challenge plan amendment.

Pursuant to Notice, this cause was heard by Linda M. Rigot, the assigned Rearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Bearings, on August 14 and 15, 1986, in Tallahassee, Florida. Petitioners Florida Association of Academic Nonpublic Schools, Jacksonville Country Day School, and The Cushman School were represented by Dexter Douglas, Esquire, and Sherry Spiers, Esquire, Tallahassee, Florida. Harold D. Smith, Esquire, Hollywood, Florida, also appeared on behalf of Petitioner Florida Association of Academic Nonpublic Schools. Respondent Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services was represented by B. Elaine New, Esquire, Tallahassee, Florida. Respondent Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services published an amendment to rule 10M-12.001, Florida Administrative Code, on June 6, 1986, in the Florida Administrative Weekly. Chapter 10M-12, Florida Administrative Code, provides the standards for licensing of child care facilities. The proposed amendment relates to the statutory exemption of schools from child care facility licensing laws. The Petitioners filed a Petition to Determine Invalidity of a Proposed Rule on June 17, 1986, and an Amended Petition to Determine Invalidity of Proposed Rule on June 18, 1986. Accordingly, the issue for determination herein is whether proposed rule 10M-12.001 is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. Petitioners presented the testimony of Howard G. Burke; Thomas A. Horkan, Jr.; Joan Drody Lutton; Patricia Cantieri, and by way of deposition Jasper Lawrence Pintacuda. Respondent presented the testimony of Jasper Lawrence Pintacuda, Pamela C. Phelps, Pamala Hutchinson, Bess Lander Bell, Allen Wankat, and Patterson Lamb. Additionally, Petitioners' Exhibits numbered 3 and 4 and Respondent's Exhibits numbered 1 and 3-6 were admitted in evidence. Both parties submitted posthearing proposed findings of fact, memoranda of law, and written closing arguments. Respondent's Motion to Strike Petitioners' posthearing pleadings for late filing was granted by Order dated September 26, 1986. Respondent's proposed findings of fact numbered 2, 3, 6, 8, and 9 have been adopted in substance. The remainder of Respondent's proposed findings of fact have rejected as follows: numbers 1, 13, 14, 18, 19, 23-25, and 27-30 as not being supported by competent, substantial evidence; and numbers 4, 5, 7, 10- 12, 15-17, 29-22, and 26 as being immaterial to the issue in this cause.HRS proposed rule re: licensing of child care facilities purported to repeal a statutory exemption for schools and was, therefore, invalid.