§ 134-122. Legislative findings and intent.

(a)

Legislative findings. The board of county commissioners finds and declares that:

(1)

The provisions of F.S. § 163.3161 et seq. establish the local government comprehensive planning and land development regulation act ("the act");

(2)

The provisions of F.S. § 163.3202(2)(g) provide that counties shall have the power and responsibility to plan comprehensively for their future development and growth, including the adoption and implementation of appropriate land development regulations which are necessary or desirable to implement a comprehensive plan;

(3)

The county adopted its comprehensive plan (the "county plan") on August 8, 1989, through the adoption of Ordinance No. 89-32;

(4)

The county plan establishes the minimum requirements necessary to maintain, through orderly growth and development, the character and stability of present and future land use and development in the unincorporated areas of the county;

(5)

Section 134-82(b) provides that the board of county commissioners retains the power and authority to enact ordinances, rules and regulations that are more restrictive than those originally adopted in the county plan;

(6)

Section 134-82(c) provides that nothing in the county plan or its subsequent land use regulations shall be construed or applied so as to result in the taking of property; and

(7)

Section 134-85(b) provides that the board of county commissioners shall establish administrative procedures which any party challenging denial of a development order or a development permit as a taking of property must exhaust before any action on a request for development is deemed final by any court or quasi-judicial proceeding.

(b)

Intent.

(1)

It is the intent of the board of county commissioners to ensure that each and every landowner has a beneficial use of owned property in accordance with the requirements of the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution, and thus, to provide an administrative procedure whereby landowners believing they have been or may be subjected to a taking of their private property by application of any law or regulation promulgated by the county may obtain relief through an efficient, non-judicial procedure.

(2)

The establishment of an administrative review and remedy procedure will promote the goals of the county plan in a manner which is consistent with section 2 of article I of the state constitution, guaranteeing all natural persons the inalienable right to acquire, possess and protect property.

(3)

It is the specific intent of the board of county commissioners that no provision of its laws or ordinances be interpreted so as to take private property in an unconstitutional manner.

(4)

It is the specific intent of the board of county commissioners that no administrative determinations made under its laws or ordinances result in either a temporary or permanent taking of private property without just compensation as required under the United States or state constitution.

(5)

The board of county commissioners specifically intends that it shall be the duty and responsibility of the party alleging a taking of property to affirmatively demonstrate the legal requisites of the claim alleged.

(6)

It is the board's specific intention that the procedures provided for in this article not be utilized routinely or frivolously, but rather, be solely limited to those extreme circumstances where a potential taking of private property or development rights would otherwise result.

(7)

It is the intent of the board of county commissioners, consistent with the provisions of F.S. § 163.3161(10), that the provisions of this article be utilized to sensitively administer the county comprehensive plan and its land development regulations.

(8)

It is the intent of the board of county commissioners, consistent with the provisions of F.S. § 163.3161(10), that the provisions of this article not be utilized as a substitute for judicial relief from takings that have already occurred but to provide an opportunity to make a final decision regarding the applicability of certain ordinances or comprehensive planning provisions to prevent inadvertent takings.

(9)

It is the additional intent of the board of county commissioners to simplify the judicial inquiry regarding the "ripeness doctrine" as enunciated in Williamson County Regional Planning Council v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) and its progeny by providing a final decision after which a taking claim may be instituted in court.

(Ord. No. 18-36 , § 3(Att. A), 10-23-18)