10th STREET PARTNERS, LLC v. COUNTY COMMISSION FOR SARASOTA COUNTY
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.
September 20, 2012.
(Doc. # 9-2 at 74). The letter asked 10th Street to provide other evidence which had not been supplied during the proceedings and which would demonstrate the necessity of the requested reasonable accommodation. The letter further stated that the Board would "be in a better position to determine your demand for a reasonable accommodation" once it was in receipt of the requested information. Id.
10th Street's counsel sent a written response to the Board's letter on June 24, 2011, but did not supply additional evidence as requested by the Board, stating in part:
I understand your desire to have my clients present evidence of an economic analysis of the efficacy and necessity of the requested rezoning. However, the Commission made its determination on the basis of the evidence presented at the hearing on February 22, 2011 and the December 16, 2010 hearing before the Planning Commission. The County Commission did not request additional evidence at that time to support the necessity of the proposed density changes for provision of a dedicated memory care unit. Therefore, the failure of the Commission to grant a reasonable accommodation — and, therefore, the discriminatory act — has already taken place.
(Doc. # 9-2 at 76). However, the letter further stated that if the Board elected to re-open the petition for reconsideration, 10th Street would consider providing additional testimony and evidence in support of its reasonable accommodation request. Id.
On July 27, 2011, the Board adopted Resolution No. 2011-147 to specifically deny 10th Street's reasonable accommodation request. The resolution stated in part that:
Based on evidence and testimony presented in the record from the February 22, 2011 public hearing, and the correspondence exchanged between the parties, the request for a reasonable accommodation for additional density association with Rezone Petition 10-13 is hereby DENIED.
(Doc. # 24-1 at 4).