It is not the first time in Florida that a developer has had to tear down illegal buildings, though the cost and number of units is high. But the court's decision is a landmark affirmation of the Florida public's role in planning, said Charles Pattison, director of 1000 Friends of Florida, the state's leading growth-management advocacy group. It could make governments adhere more strictly to their own growth plans and require developers to do the same. The case also is a tribute to the tenacity of Pinecrest Lakes residents Karen and Paul Shidel and their attorney Richard Grosso, who wouldn't give up even after the Pinecrest Lakes Homeowners Association settled with the developers. 

The Martin County Commission approved the apartments, despite knowing that the complex violated the county's growth plan. It required a wide buffer between the apartments and nearby homes. Two of the commissioners who approved the apartments, Dennis Armstrong and Elmire Gainey,are up for reelection this fall.

Ms. Shidel and her neighbors protested becasue without a buffer of space and trees, apartment dwellers can look into the homeowners' houses and yards. At one point, the courts calculated that the Shidels' home, once appraised at $175,000, had dropped $26,500 in value after the apartments were built. 

Mr. Grosso said the Pinecrest Lakes case changes the understanding of the rights neighbors have to challenge a new development. Previously, county staff and developers made the decisions, while neighbors of proposed new developments largely were ignored at public hearings. Ms. Shidel and her neighbors asked the county to follow its own rules, to leave enough land and trees between the apratments and houses to meet the requirements of the growth plan. Commissioners blew them off. 

With the Pinecrest Lakes case resolved, taxpaying neighbors of proposed developments could have a voice in such decisions equal to that of county officials and the developer. At least there is legal precedent for that to happen.