CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ALEXANDER W. ALVIN AND DOROTHY W. ALVIN, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The City of South Miami appealed a decree invalidating residential zoning on the Alvins' property as unreasonable and confiscatory. The court reversed, holding that the residential zoning classification fell within the 'fairly debatable rule' and was therefore reasonable and should be upheld.
The court held that the residential zoning classification was reasonable and fell within the 'fairly debatable rule,' and therefore should be upheld. The court rejected the Alvins' arguments based on traffic impact and lack of sales as insufficient grounds to invalidate the zoning.
“We find that the zoning classification established by the City is within the fairly "debatable rule", as' pronounced by the appellate courts of this State and, therefore, should be upheld.”
This establishes the applicable legal standard for reviewing zoning classifications—the 'fairly debatable rule'—which the court found the residential zoning satisfied.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Alvins purchased a tract of land in the late 1930s at the northwest corner of Ludlum Road and Sunset Drive in South Miami. The property was zoned …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Declaratory Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal brings on for review a final decree holding that any zoning maintained on the appellees’ property as restrictive as residential use RU-1A is unreasonable, arbitrary and confiscatory. We reverse.
It appears from the record that the appellees, in the late 30’s, purchased a tract of land at the northwest corner of the intersection of Ludlum Road and Sunset Drive, in the City of South Miami. That the property, at the time of the institution of this suit, was zoned as residential one acre estates. That, pending the litigation, the municipal authorities rezoned the property to a more liberal residential classification. The principal evidence relied on by the appellees to establish the arbitrariness and unreasonableness of this latter residential zoning was the impact of traffic in the area, the fact that they had not had any sales on that portion of the tract remaining [although it was apparent that over the years they had disposed of certain of the land they originally owned], and that there was a church erected in the residential zone on the land occupying the southwest corner of the intersection and a school occupying the land on the southeast corner of the intersection. The evidence further reflected that there was a residence situated on the land on the northeast corner. From a review of the record in its entirety, it is apparent that the entire area surrounding the property involved within the confines of the City of South Miami is residential in character.
The primary complaint of the appellees is the excess traffic and, undoubtedly, this does make the property less desirable than other residential land. However, this is not a sufficient reason to liberalize residential zoning. See: Freeman v. City of Yonkers, 205 Misc. 947, 129 N.Y.S.2d 703; Deligtisch v. Town of Greenburg, N.Y.S.Ct.1954, 135 N.Y.S.2d 220; Page v. City of Portland, 1946, 178 Or. 632, 165 P.2d 280; 101 C.J.S. Zoning, § 95. Neither is the fact that rezoning will enhance the value of the property. See: Polk Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Lakeland, Fla.App.1962, 143 So.2d 917; Burritt v. Harris, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 168.
We find that the zoning classification established by the City is within the fairly “debatable rule”, as' pronounced by the appellate courts of this State and, therefore, should be upheld. See: City of *388Miami Beach v. Wiesen, Fla. 1956, 86 So.2d 442; City of Miami Beach v. Prevatt, Fla. 1957, 97 So.2d 473.
Therefore, for the reasons stated above, the final decree here under review is hereby reversed, with directions to dismiss the cause.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. City OF Miami Beach, 213 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…er Miami Hebrew Academy, supra; Snipes v. City of Hialeah, Fla.App.1959, 114 So. 2d 214; Town of Surfside v. Skyline Terrace Corp., Fla.App. [*285] 1960, 120 So. 2d 20; Neubauer v. Town of Surfside, supra; City of South Miami v. Alvin, Fla.App.1966, 189 So. 2d 386; City of Miami v. Zorovich, Fla.App.1967, 195 So. 2d 31. During the oral argument of this cause, some reliance was placed by the appellants and the appellees, DeMaris’, in a recent opinion of this court in Kugel v. City of Miami Beach, Fla.App.1968…
-
Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Greenlee, 224 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…the heavy traffic on Krome Avenue was a factor in arriving at the decision to require a rezoning. Generally, excess traffic alone is not a sufficient ground to authorize a change in residential zoning. See City of South Miami v. Alvin, Fla.App.1966, 189 So. 2d 386; Snipes v. City of Hialeah, Fla.App.1959, 114 So. 2d 214; Bessemer Properties, Inc. v. Miami Shores Village, Fla.App.1959, 110 So. 2d 87. In City of Miami v. Zorovich, Fla. App.1967, 195 So. 2d 31, 36, we held: * * * * * * “ * * * ¿4 zoning ordin…
-
Donch v. City OF Miami, 214 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…would constitute spot zoning and, therefore, we refuse to interfere with the action of the trial judge in upholding the zoning classification. Harris v. City of Coral Gables, Fla.App.1963, 157 So. 2d 146; City of South Miami v. Alvin, Fla.App.1966, 189 So. 2d 386; Smith v. City of Miami Beach, Fla. App.1968, 213 So. 2d 281, (opinion filed August 6, 1968). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- City OF Miami Beach v. Wiesen, 86 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 1956)
- City OF Miami Beach v. Prevatt, 97 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1957)
- Burritt v. Harris, 166 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Horton v. Elwin L. Moore, 143 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Polk Enters., Inc. v. City OF Lakeland, 143 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)