09-1008 NASSAU COUNTY and LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS, husband and wife, ROBERT H. STILL, JR. and MICHAEL D. ABNEY, as Co-Trustees of the LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS TRUST u/d/o DECE

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Florida First District Court » 2010 » 09-1008 NASSAU COUNTY and LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS, husband and wife, ROBERT H. STILL, JR. and MICHAEL D. ABNEY, as Co-Trustees of the LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS TRUST u/d/o DECE

State: Florida

Court: Florida First District Court

Docket No: 09-1008

Case Date: 06/03/2010

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA NASSAU COUNTY, Appellant, v. LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS, husband and wife, ROBERT H. STILL, JR. and MICHAEL D. ABNEY, as Co-Trustees of the LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS TRUST u/d/o DECEMBER 31, 1992, VINCENT G. GRAHAM, PIEDMONT SQUARE, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Corporation, AMELIA ISLAND COMPANY and CRANE ISLAND INVESTMENTS LLC, a South Carolina Limited Liability Corporation, Intervenors-Appellants, v. ERIC TITCOMB, ROBERT WEINTRAUB, and JULIE FERREIRA, Appellees. _____________________________/ Opinion filed June 3, 2010. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassau County. Brian J. Davis, Judge. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D09-1008

David A. Hallman and Mollie M. Garrett, Yulee, for Appellant. Fred D. Franklin, Jr., and Cristine M. Russell of Rogers, Towers, P.A., Jacksonville, for Intervenors-Appellants. Ralf Brookes, Cape Coral, for Appellees.

THOMAS, J. In this case, we must decide two issues. First, must a person challenging a development order based on an alleged conflict with a county`s comprehensive plan show more than demonstrated recreational interests in the natural resources of the affected area in order to establish standing, pursuant to section 163.3215, Florida Statutes? We answer this question in the negative, and hold that such interests are sufficient under the plain text of the statute, especially in light of liberalizing amendments to the standing requirements. See City of Ft. Myers v. Splitt, 988 So. 2d 28, 31-32 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Second, we must decide whether a county`s comprehensive plan policy that permits density adjustments based on an official jurisdictional wetlands
2

determination is ambiguous or unlawful under chapter 163, Florida Statutes. We hold it is not ambiguous or unlawful. We therefore reverse the trial court`s order setting aside the development order. I. Facts and Procedural History A. Nassau County's Comprehensive Plan This action concerns the development of a privately-owned 207-acre site known as Crane Island located in Nassau County, Florida. In June 1993, Nassau County and The Department of Community Affairs (the Department) entered into a stipulated settlement agreement approving and amending Nassau County`s Comprehensive Plan (the Comprehensive Plan). The Comprehensive Plan

contains a future land use element which sets forth several polices, goals, and objectives concerning the treatment and development of wetlands in Nassau County. A critical part of the Comprehensive Plan is the Future Land Use Map in which each parcel of property is given a land use designation. That designation determines the density at which the property may be developed. Comprehensive Plan, as amended per the settlement agreement, provides: 1
1

The

Language added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined, and deleted material is stricken through.
3

Conservation lands placed under the Limited Development Overlay may not be developed at a density greater than 1 residential dwelling unit per five acres with all permitted development clustered on the upland portion of the site or on that portion of the site which will be least environmentally impacted by construction/development. Where unless underlying land use as shown on the Future Land Use Map designates a lesser density, in which case the density of the underlying land use shall prevail. Passive recreation and silviculture, also, are permitted uses in the Limited Development Overlay area. If there is indication that wetland is present on a proposed development site, the developer shall be required to request a wetland determination from the St. Johns River Water Management District. Areas of Nassau County designated as Conservation land use to be included under a Limited Development Overlay, include all areas shown as wetlands on the Future Land Use Map series except for Fort Clinch State Park and Aquatic Preserve, Nassau River-St. Johns River Marshes Aquatic Preserve and Cary State Forest. Historic properties may also be included in the category of Limited Development. With regard to protection of natural resources, changes made pursuant to the settlement agreement were as follows: 1.04A.02 The County shall restrict development in conservation areas to the maximum extent possible short of a taking. Development in conservation (Limited Development) will be permitted that must be permitted will proceed at a density of no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres with permitted density clustered on the upland
4

portion of the parcel or on that part of the parcel that will least environmentally be affected by construction/development. Where the Future Land Use Map identifies an unless underlying land use requires of less density, In such cases, density of conservation areas will satisfy underlying land use density the density of the underlying land use will prevail. Development will be prohibited in areas designated as Conservation

Download 09-1008 NASSAU COUNTY and LYNWOOD G. WILLIS and JANE T. WILLIS, husband and wife