Resolution 111-1999
County Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. III -1999
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, EVIDENCING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDED VESTED
RIGHTS DETERMINATION PROMULGATED BY THE VESTED RIGHTS HEARING
OFFICER, IN RE: THE APPLICATION OF CITILAND INVESTMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, on January 4, 1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
became effective; and
WHEREAS, development applications "in the pipeline" as of January 4, 1996 are subject
to a determination of vested rights pursuant to Policy 101.18.1 of the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the matter of Citiland Investment Corporation for determination of vested
rights was heard by Vested Rights Hearing Officer Larry Erskine, now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,
FLORIDA, that the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are APPROVED and the Vested
Rights application of Citiland Investment Corporation is accordingly, DENIED.
Mayor Wilhelmina Harvey
Commissioner Shirley Freeman
Commissioner George Neugent
--;~issioner Mary Kay Reich
~/ '~~oner Nora Williams
ill". ~~ .'\
il,~ ,,\5- 1\..':"'0.....'\
'I'"~''' .(.1't~ , "~-e
;v.q, "'~'I
:;)~~ ,;: /1;1
;A'+1"<'~'.:i., KOLHAGE, Clerk
1,\> ,~';j t>-/':v
B~~, \~,~~~
Deputy Clerk
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners orrMonroib CQJ.1nty,
00\00_
z ?;: :xr-
Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 10th day of March, 19<i!iPS'1: ~ a
"":x-<
("'). r- N .."
0(") . (;,) C)
c:: - ....... :::u
z;:;O .-, __
. ,:;) "" ......
-;("')1- :x ......,
:< -;:r: ;-:: ~
.,,' )> 0."::' .. ,,,
r- C') 0 C)
l> ", -... :::u
. -. c
yes
yes
yes
yes
YI::::;
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
l.,".:-.'" 'I'" ~1\~
~'v;..t~,-~~~",,'\' ..
By
Mayor/Chairman
jvrcitiland
~
R BERT " E
DATE / ~?? 1"9-'
BEFORE THE VESTED RIGHTS HEARING OFFICER
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
In Re: the application of: Citiland Investment Corp.,
a Florida Corporation: 131 Lots in Reformed Plat of Grassy
Key Beach, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat
Book 7, Page 19 of the Public Records of Monroe County,
Florida.
/
RECOMMENDED ORDER DENYING VESTED RIGHTS
TillS CAUSE came on to be heard by the Monroe County Vested Rights Hearing Officer
on April 27, 1998. The undersigned reviewed the application and exhibits, and heard the
testimony of the Applicant. Finally, the undersigned heard argument of counsel on behalf of the
Applicant and Monroe County. Subsequent to the hearing referred to hereinabove, the
undersigned received and reviewed the following:
a. A Memorandum of Law submitted by the Applicant;
b. A Response to the Applicant's Memorandum of Law submitted on behalf of
Monroe County;
c. A transcript of the hearing.
Being fully advised in the premises, the undersigned makes the following findings of fact
and conclusions of law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. During the period beginning on September 26, 1989, and ending March 20, 1990, the
Applicant lent a total of $1.8 million to the owners of the subject property, which loan was
secured in the form of a mortgage.
Page 1
,,;
j'
2. On June 27, 1994, the Applicant obtained fee simple title to the subject property
pursuant to a certificate of title resulting from a foreclosure of the mortgages referred to in the
preceding paragraph.
3. Since acquiring the property as referred to in the preceding paragraph, the Applicant
has not applied for building permits or filed ROGO applications for any of the subject lots.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4. In order to obtain a determination of vested rights, the Applicant must first establish it
reasonably relied upon an official act of the County. The recordation of a subdivision plat may
constitute such an official act, and the Applicant relies upon same.
5. Next, the Applicant must demonstrate that, acting in good faith, it made such a
substantial change of position or it has incurred such extensive obligations and expenses that it
would be highly inequitable or unjust to affect those rights by requiring it to now conform to the
current comprehensive plan and land development regulations. The Applicant did, in fact, loan
substantial sums in reliance on the Land Use Plan and land development regulations in effect in
1989.
6. Under the third prong of the vested rights provision, the Applicant has the burden of
establishing "that the development has commenced and has continued in good faith without
substantial interruption." Inasmuch as neither the Applicant nor the prior owner of the subject
lots has requested any type of development approval whatsoever or expended sums for
development, the Applicant is unable to establish that development has commenced or continued
on the lots included within this vested rights application.
IT IS THEREFORE, the recommendation of the undersigned that:
7. The Applicant's Request For Vested Rights be denied.
8. Further, the Applicant's request for relief based on Applicant's interpretation of
Section 380.05(18), Florida Statutes, be denied in accordance with the ruling of the undersigned
in RE: the applications of ABBOTT, et al.
Page 2.
./
,.
----."'^-.,-~....,....,,"'_.~.__,....,..c."_......
DONE AND ORDERED in Monroe County, Florida, this I Z-- day of November, 1998.
:t K_
LARRYR. ERSKINE, ESQ.
VESTED RIGHTS OFFICER
FLORIDA BAR #313521
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and exact copy of the foregoing was mailed via U.S.
Mail to: James Mattson, Esq., Mattson & Tobin, P.O. Box 586, Key Largo, FL 33037 and
Karen Cabanas, Esq., Morgan & Hendrick, 317 Whitehead Street, Key West, FL 33040; this
I"j... day of November, 1998.
-LR
LARRYR. ERSKINE, ESQ.
MEYER & ERSKINE
31211 AVENUE A
BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043
(305) 872-3400
(305) 872-4822 FAX
Page~
~'
,'.