HomeMy WebLinkAbout120 CHERRY ST., CHERRY ST. STATION - PDP - 9-05 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONAnne Aspen - Hearing Officer designation for type I review- Cherry Street Station Page 1
From: Adam Reeves <areeves@highstream.net>
To: aaspen <aaspen@fcgov.com>
Date: 09/07/2005 4:14:13 PM
Subject: Hearing Officer designation for type I review- Cherry Street Station
Dear Ms. Aspen -
I apologize for the interrupting you with a phone call while you had
looming deadlines. I haven't followed this project closely and only
recently became aware of the intention to designate a hearing officer as
the decisionmaker rather than the Director.
I would like to note that I find no authorization within the land use
code for the appointment of a "Hearing Officer" for anything other than
vested rights and takings determinations. My reading is that the LUC
clearly identifies the relevant decisionmaker for Type I hearings as the
Director of Current Planning. In pertinent part the LUC states:
2.2.7 Step 7: Public Hearing
(A) Decision maker.
(1) Administrative Review (Type 1 review). An administrative review
process is hereby established wherein certain development applications
shall be processed, reviewed, considered and approved, approved with
conditions, or denied by the Director pursuant to the general procedural
requirements contained in Division 2.1, and the common development
review procedures contained in Division 2.2. For those development
applications that are subject to administrative review, the Director
shall be the designated decision maker.
I have not had the opportunity to thoroughly research whether there is
any legal authority that would authorize the delegation of this function.
Thank you
Adam T. Reeves