November 2001
MEMORANDUM TO CLIENTS

 CONSTRUCTION: LITTLE PIG LITTLE PIG LET ME IN - OR I=LL HUFF AND
I=LL PUFF AND I=LL BLOW YOUR HOUSE DOWN

Who would have thought a developer could be ordered to demolish several two-story residential buildings, resulting in a $3.3 million loss? Because of the perseverance and persistence of two single-family homeowners in a Martin County subdivision, adjacent to the two-story buildings, a trial court did just that. More amazing to many, the trial court=s judgment was affirmed by the appellate court's decision in Pinecrest Lakes v. Shidel, 26 Fla. L. Weekly D2330 (Fla. 4^th DCA, September 26, 2001).

A developer, Pinecrest Lakes purchased 500 acres in Martin County with the intention of developing the land in phases. After developing phases one through nine as single-family homes, Pinecrest decided to develop phase ten as multi-family structures. The Martin County Comprehensive Plan provided that Anew development of undeveloped abutting lands shall be required to include compatible structure types of land immediately adjacent to existing single family development.@ Over neighboring single-family homeowners= objections, the County issued a development order for phase ten, permitting the construction of 19 two-story buildings.

The homeowners sued the County, alleging the development order was inconsistent with the County=s comprehensive plan. The trial court initially ruled in Pinecrest=s favor. While that decision was being appealed, Pinecrest decided to begin construction instead of waiting for the appeal=s conclusion. Unfortunately for Pinecrest, the appellate court reversed, finding that the trial court=s initial judgment was inconsistent with the County=s plan and ordered a new trial. After a new trial, the following relief was ordered:

Martin County was enjoined from taking any further action on the subject Development Order for Phase Ten, other than to rescind it;

Developer Pinecrest and its successors in interest were enjoined from any further development of Phase Ten under the subject Development Order; and

Developer Pinecrest was ordered to remove all apartment buildings from Phase Ten either through demolition or physical relocation by a date certain.

For perhaps the first time in Florida, an appellate court ruled a trial court has the authority to order the complete demolition and removal of buildings because the construction was inconsistent with a county=s comprehensive plan. The appellate court rejected the developer Pinecrest=s argument that the court should have weighed the loss it suffered against the diminution in value of the homeowners. The court found that a crucial portion of the comprehensive plan law, Fla. Stat. '163.3215, Fla. Stat. (2000), does not require a trial court to weigh equities before granting an injunction. The court indicated that the developer could have avoided its problems if it had only waited until the appeal was completed. The court rationalized that by allowing developers to ignore land use requirements and then buy themselves out of compliance would render growth management laws meaningless.

It should be noted, however, the decision is not yet final. The Florida Supreme Court has yet to weigh in.

FAIR HOUSING: DO NOT PLAY GAMES, GO TO THE SEMINAR

Want a AGet out of Jail Free@ card? Being a director or manager is not a game. Administering an association is not like running a social club. Instead, there are significant business decisions that must be made.

In this regard, the firm=s attorneys have observed an increase in the number of complaints alleging violations of various fair housing laws. Many associations are not aware of the laws= broad expanse, or how seemingly innocuous actions can have disastrous effects. In an effort to re-educate yourself, it should be worthwhile to attend the APalm Beach County Fair Housing Summit on Current Trends in Fair Housing@ on November 13, 2001 at the Sheraton Hotel at CityPlace. Admission is free; however, preregistration is required. For more information, contact the Palm Beach County Office of Equal Opportunity at (561) 355 - 4884.

HOLIDAY REMINDER

Association clients, please ensure that your new assessment transmittals, including your Authorization Checklist, current ledger and any pertinent backup materials, are received by the firm no later than December 10, 2001. This will help us expedite matters. We seek to mail initial demand letters before the holiday rush to avoid the Postal Service=s mid-December high volume delayed delivery times.

Additionally, please use your monthly newsletter (yes, you should have a monthly newsletter) to remind members to set aside funds for their January 2002 assessments. A few words now may help your neighbors avoid assessment problems.

FIRM NEWS

The firm will be closing its office in observance of Veteran=s Day on Monday, November12, 2001 and in observance of Thanksgiving on Thursday, November 22, and Friday, November 23, 2001.

© 2001 by Gelfand & Arpe, P.A.