Zoning Variance

65 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Shelton v. City OF Coll. Station
  780 F.2d 475· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-06 ·cited 78×
• Elwyn v. City OF Miami
  113 So. 2d 849· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-06-02 ·cited 78×
  Residents and property owners challenged a zoning variance granted by the City of Miami for a gasoline service station, claiming the variance was improperly granted on the basis of self-imposed hardship. The court held that the complaint stated a valid cause of action challenging
• Thompson v. Planning Comm'n OF the City OF Jacksonville
  464 So. 2d 1231· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-02-11 ·cited 56×
  Thompson property owners sought to enjoin construction of an office building across the street after the Planning Commission granted a parking variance to the owners. The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of preliminary injunction, finding that the variance was im
• Town OF Indialantic v. Nance
  400 So. 2d 37· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-05-20 ·cited 42×
  The Town of Indialantic denied James Nance's request for a zoning variance to construct a six-story building on oceanfront property, claiming hardship. The circuit court reversed, ordering the variance be granted. The appellate court reversed the circuit court, holding that the e
• Friedland v. City OF Hollywood
  130 So. 2d 306· Fla. 2d DCA· 1961-05-24 ·cited 38×
  Property owners appealed the trial court's decision to void a city ordinance granting a zoning variance for a service station in Hollywood, Florida. The court affirmed, holding that the variance was improper spot zoning because the owners failed to demonstrate unique hardship and
• Herrera v. City OF Miami
  600 So. 2d 561· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-23 ·cited 31×
  A variance reducing parking-space requirements cannot be granted where the applicant has not demonstrated that the land cannot yield a reasonable return under existing zoning or that the hardship was not self-created, or that the project cannot be reduced in size to satisfy zonin
• Allstate Mortg. Corp. of Fla. v. City OF Miami Beach
  308 So. 2d 629· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-01-21 ·cited 28×
  Allstate Mortgage Corporation appealed a Circuit Court order denying its petition for certiorari to review a zoning variance granted by Miami Beach's Board of Adjustment. The court reversed, holding that the Circuit Court erred by applying the wrong legal standard for variance re
• J. C. Vereen & Sons, Inc. v. City OF Miami
  397 So. 2d 979· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-04-21 ·cited 20×
  J.C. Vereen & Sons sought to rescind a 1953 conditional deed of dedication to the City of Miami, claiming abandonment under common law and Florida statutory provisions. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment that the property had not been abandoned and that the City held c
• Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Metro. Dade Cnty. & Dade Cnty. v. Lowas
  348 So. 2d 13· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-06-14 ·cited 20×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's quashing of the Board of County Commissioners' resolution that granted a commercial tennis club an unusual use permit in a residential estate area. The court held that the Board improperly conducted a de novo heari
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. David H. Brown v. City OF Wilmington Zoning Bd. OF Adjustment
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2007-06-25 ·cited 19×
  The Superior Court denied the motion to dismiss and granted the motion to amend the petition for writ of certiorari. The court held that while CCS was a necessary party that had been omitted, the petitioners could amend their petition to add CCS because the amendment related back
• Auerbach v. City OF Miami
  929 So. 2d 693· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-05-24 ·cited 19×
  A neighbor challenged a city commission's grant of a major use special permit and zoning variance for a residential development project. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the special permit but reversed and quashed the variance, finding it lacked the required legal hard
• Broward Cnty. v. Bharat Patel
  641 So. 2d 40· Fla.· 1994-05-19 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that in eminent domain proceedings involving severance damages, evidence that future zoning variances could mitigate losses is admissible, but only if the party demonstrates a reasonable probability the variance will be granted, and the evidence mus
• Mei-Ling Bernard v. The Town Council OF the Town OF Palm Beach
  569 So. 2d 853· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-11-07 ·cited 18×
  Mei-Ling Bernard challenges a zoning variance granted to her neighbor Polly Davidson by the Palm Beach Town Council. The court holds that the circuit court applied the wrong legal standard for reviewing zoning variances and remands for application of the correct test requiring su
• Town OF Indialantic v. Nance
  485 So. 2d 1318· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-03-13 ·cited 16×
  The circuit court erred in reinstating the Board of Adjustment's decision granting variances because there was no competent, substantial evidence of a unique hardship to the landowner.
• City OF Ormond Beach v. State of Fla. upon the relation of Charles J. DEL Marco
  426 So. 2d 1029· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-01-19 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court affirmed in part and reversed in part a trial court's decision granting variances for a windmill, finding that while a city cannot prohibit renewable energy devices, the trial court erred in granting the variances without sufficient findings.
• Weber v. The Zoning Bd. OF Appeals OF the City OF W. Palm Beach
  206 So. 2d 258· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-01-25 ·cited 12×
  Helen S. Weber challenged a zoning variance granted by the West Palm Beach Zoning Board of Appeals by filing a certiorari petition in circuit court. The circuit court dismissed the petition, holding it lacked jurisdiction because the City of West Palm Beach was not named as a res
• Dade Cnty. v. Frank N' BUN Operating Co., Inc.
  169 So. 2d 875· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-12-22 ·cited 12×
  Dade County appeals a certiorari judgment that granted Frank N' Bun Operating Co. a variance from zoning distance requirements for a package liquor store. The court reversed, holding that the zoning appeals board lacked authority to grant the variance because the applicant showed
• Albright v. Hensley
  492 So. 2d 852· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-08-21 ·cited 10×
  Property owners challenged a zoning variance granted by the Marion County Board of Adjustment that reduced required lot width from 85 to 78 feet. The appellees claimed the variance was granted without evidentiary support for required statutory findings. The court affirmed the tri
• Shelton v. City OF Coll. Station
  754 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-11 ·cited 10×
  Summary judgment was improvidently granted because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the zoning board's denial of a variance was arbitrary and discriminatory, and whether individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity.
• Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. TWO Parcels OF Land ONE 1691 SQ. Foot More OR Less Parcel OF Land IN the Town OF NEW London
  822 F.2d 1261· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Amtrak's condemnation of property for a service road, as part of a cooperative agreement with the city, was within its statutory authority, and that federal law, not state law, governed the measure of just compensation to avoid frustrating federal objectives.
• City OF Coral Gables v. Geary
  383 So. 2d 1127· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-05-20 ·cited 9×
  A hardship arising from the unique physical characteristics of a property, rather than the owner's actions, is not considered 'self-created' and can justify a zoning variance, even if the property was purchased with knowledge of the restrictions.
• Centerfold Club, Inc. v. City of St. Petersburg
  969 F. Supp. 1288· M.D. Fla.· 1997-05-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Adult Use Zoning Regulation is a content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction, and that the City had a reasonable basis for enacting it based on studies from other cities. The court also found that the ordinance provides reasonable alternative avenu
• Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Wood
  662 So. 2d 417· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-11-08 ·cited 7×
  The Third District Court of Appeal reversed a writ of prohibition that prevented the Board of County Commissioners from reviewing a zoning decision appealed by the Lakes By The Bay Community Council. The court held that the Board has the right to make an initial determination of
• Crossroads Lounge, Inc. v. The City OF Miami
  195 So. 2d 232· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-02-07 ·cited 7×
  This case addresses whether a transferee of a liquor license can obtain a zoning variance based on the hardship of the transferor (original licensee) whose property was taken by eminent domain. The court held that a variance requires exceptional hardship unique to the applicant,
• The Smalleylogics Corp. v. Dade Cnty.
  176 So. 2d 574· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-06-15 ·cited 7×
  Smalleylogics Corporation sought to enjoin Dade County from canceling its airport use permit, claiming it had a vested non-conforming use right in a 30-acre parcel. The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint, holding that the airport operator's conversion of its original non-c
• Collard v. The Inc. Vill. OF Flower Hill
  759 F.2d 205· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 6×
  A federal court is precluded from hearing a civil rights claim that could have been raised in a prior state court proceeding if state law would bar such a claim.
• Fort Lauderdale Bd. OF Adjustment & City of Fort Lauderdale v. Nash
  425 So. 2d 578· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-12-22 ·cited 6×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a circuit court decision that had set aside the Fort Lauderdale Board of Adjustment's denial of a zoning variance for an encroaching structure. The appellate court held that the property owner failed to establish the exceptional hardsh
• Servatt v. Dade Cnty.
  173 So. 2d 175· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-03-23 ·cited 6×
  The denial of a zoning variance was affirmed because the applicant failed to demonstrate unnecessary hardship.
• City OF Hialeah v. Woods
  121 So. 2d 41· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-06-02 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision invalidating a zoning variance ordinance and enjoining the city from issuing building permits for non-residential purposes. The court found no reversible error and relied on a prior ruling.
• Sarasota Cnty. v. Kemper
  746 So. 2d 539· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-12-10 ·cited 4×
  Sarasota County appealed a circuit court's decision that granted a zoning variance to Kemper based on equitable estoppel. The District Court of Appeal reversed, finding the circuit court applied an incorrect standard of review by focusing solely on estoppel rather than reviewing
• New Port Largo, Inc. v. Monroe Cnty.
  873 F. Supp. 633· S.D. Fla.· 1994-12-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's Fifth Amendment takings claim was not ripe because it failed to exhaust state remedies for inverse condemnation. However, the due process claims were ripe.
• Milton v. Milich and Sylvia Milich
  263 So. 2d 263· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-05-30 ·cited 4×
  Homeowners who received a variance to build a residence but had a condition imposed requiring dedication of a 5-foot strip of their lot for street purposes sued to void the dedication after construction was complete. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that the homeowners faile
• Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Valdes
  9 So. 3d 17· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-01-21 ·cited 3×
  Miami-Dade County challenged a lower court decision finding that the County's refusal to rezone respondent Valdes's single-family residential property constituted impermissible 'reverse spot zoning' where the property was surrounded by commercial uses, a busy thoroughfare, and a
• The City OF Jacksonville v. Taylor
  721 So. 2d 1212· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-12-17 ·cited 3×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the circuit court's decision that had overturned the City Council's denial of a zoning variance to the Taylors. The court held that the circuit court misapplied the law governing zoning variances by improperly considering whether neig
• Fort Lauderdale Bd. OF Adjustment & City of Fort Lauderdale v. Nash
  413 So. 2d 855· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-05-12 ·cited 3×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal granted certiorari and reversed the circuit court's reversal of a zoning variance denial, holding that a reviewing court in a certiorari proceeding must confine its consideration solely to the administrative record and cannot conduct independen
• Wolk v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs
  117 So. 3d 1219· Fla. 5th DCA· 2013-07-05 ·cited 2×
  The court quashed a Board of County Commissioners' decision granting a variance for a fence setback while simultaneously concluding the variance was unnecessary. The court held that the Board failed to apply the six statutory criteria required for variance approval and that the c
• Richbon, Inc. v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  791 So. 2d 505· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-07-11 ·cited 2×
  Richbon, Inc. sought a writ of certiorari to quash a circuit court decision affirming a code enforcement board's denial of a certificate of use and occupancy for The Mint Lounge, a nightclub with adult entertainment. The Third District Court of Appeal granted the writ, holding th
• Bharat Patel v. Broward Cnty.
  613 So. 2d 582· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-02-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government cannot present evidence of proposed alterations to a condemnee's property for cost-to-cure damages if those alterations depend on obtaining a zoning variance.
• Park OF Commerce Assocs. v. City OF Delray Beach
  606 So. 2d 633· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-09-02 ·cited 2×
  Park of Commerce Associates and Land Resources Investment Co. appealed the trial court's decision upholding the City of Delray Beach's denial of a site plan for a proposed Florida Power & Light customer service center. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, ho
• The Planning Comm'n OF the City OF Jacksonville & the City of Jacksonville v. L.E. Brooks
  579 So. 2d 270· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-05-03 ·cited 2×
  In this original writ of certiorari proceeding, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's quashing of the Planning Commission's denial of L.E. Brooks's application for a zoning exception for off-street parking. The court held that once an applicant for a spe
• Exch. Invs., Inc. v. Alachua Cnty.
  481 So. 2d 1223· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-11-27 ·cited 2×
  Exchange Investments appeals the dismissal of their complaint challenging Alachua County's rezoning of Interstate Management Corporation's property. The court reverses, holding that property owners within one mile of a rezoned parcel have standing to challenge zoning decisions ba
• City OF Naples v. Clam Court Marina Tr.
  413 So. 2d 475· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-05-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the City's determination that the apartment constituted two dwelling units was reasonable and not arbitrary, and that the applicant failed to meet the conditions for a variance.
• City OF Riviera Beach v. Monmouth Lumber Corp.
  259 So. 2d 194· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-03-09 ·cited 2×
• Clouser v. King David
  309 F.2d 233· D.C. Cir.· 1962-10-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a landowner's personal financial hardship, not stemming from the property's exceptional characteristics, is insufficient to justify a zoning variance.
• Orlando v. Comtois
  223 So. 2d 560· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-06-12 ·cited 1×
  Charles Orlando appealed a circuit court order quashing a zoning variance granted by the Board of Adjustment for his property in Volusia County, Florida. The court affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that the Board of Adjustment exceeded its authority by effectively rezo
• Pepper v. Dade Cnty.
  209 So. 2d 684· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-04-09 ·cited 1×
  This case involves an appeal from a circuit court's denial of a petition for certiorari, which sought to review a county commission's denial of a zoning change and variance. The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, finding no reversible error.
• Friends of the H. Fletcher Brown Mansion v. City of Wilmington
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2013-07-26
  The Court affirmed the Zoning Board of Adjustment's decision to grant variances, finding that the Board had a quorum, and substantial evidence supported its conclusions regarding consistency with the comprehensive plan, non-exacerbation of parking problems, and the necessity of t
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Little Italy Neighborhood Ass'n v. C.A. No.: 09A-09-003 FSS City OF Wilmington Zoning Bd. OF Adjustment
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2010-06-30
  The court reversed the zoning board's decision to grant a variance, holding that the non-profit applicant failed to demonstrate the "unnecessary hardship" or "exceptional practical difficulties" required by law. While the court affirmed the neighborhood association's standing and
• 09 05
  9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2009-02-17
  Landowners Jack and Ernestine Beattie sought certiorari review of a zoning board's denial of their hardship variance application to build a residence on a triangular lakefront lot in Winter Park, Florida. The court affirmed the board's denial, holding that the Beatties' hardship
• In & for Kent Cnty. Clarence W. McKinney, SR.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2002-07-31
  The Court affirmed the Board of Adjustment's decision to grant a variance for the expansion of a legal nonconforming structure. The Court found that the proposed expansion did not violate the 25% gross square footage limitation for nonconforming uses because the property was a di