Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Yeline Goin
Yeline Goin
Visitors: 45
0
Bar #934593(FL)     License for 32 years
Fort Myers FL

Are you Yeline Goin? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

00-003041GM  1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND THE CITY OF STUART  (2000)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 26, 2000
The issues in this case are whether certain amendments to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (ICE) of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Stuart (City), adopted by Ordinance No. 1702-99, are "in compliance," as defined in and required by the "Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act," Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes.Agency intent to determine City`s plan policies in compliance. Recommended one policy deferred planning in joint planning area to inter-local agreements; other policy incorporated the deferred planning; both not in compliance for that reason.
97-004582GM  MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS vs CITY OF STUART  (1997)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 08, 1997
The issue in these cases is whether amendments to the City of Stuart's comprehensive plan, designated amendments 97-S1, 97-1, 98-R1, and 98-ER1 by the Department of Community Affairs, are "in compliance" as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes.Petitioners failed to prove that large and small-scale annexation amendments and evaluation and appraisal amendments to the City of Stuart comprehensive plan were not in compliance.
99-002638  KIM MOORE, ET AL. vs ANN AND GARY VIOLET AND COUNTY OF MONROE  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 14, 1999
This is an appeal from a resolution of the Monroe County Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") approving the Minor Conditional Use application of Ann and Gary Violet and Violet Communications for a radio tower and a transmitter equipment building to be constructed on Ramrod Key. The instant appeal was transferred from the Planning Commission to the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to Article XIV, Monroe County Code, the Hearing Officer Appellate Article. The issue presented in this appeal is whether Resolution No. P13-99 of the Planning Commission should be affirmed, reversed, or modified.Planning Commission erred in treating a communication tower as a communication system. They should have reviewed the application for a permit under stricter standards applied to communication towers. The Planning Commission resolution was reversed.

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