CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PALM BEACH COUNTY, AND K. W. ROWAN, AS INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS FOR SAID RESPONDENT, CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL., T. E. DUFFEY
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 West Palm Beach appealed a mandamus order compelling it to issue a building permit that it had denied. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the mandamus judgment, holding that the ordinance provision requiring new buildings to "substantially equal" adjacent buildings in appearance, square footage, and height was an unconstitutional exercise of police power lacking sufficient definitional certainty.
The Court affirmed the mandamus judgment and held that the ordinance provision requiring new buildings to substantially equal adjacent buildings in appearance, square footage, and height is void because zoning regulations imposing aesthetic exactions must be fixed in the ordinance with certainty and not left to the whim or caprice of the administrative agency.
“Zoning is an exercise of police power and ordinarily the exercise of such power in zoning has relation to structural qualities and the use of structures when considered in reference to the protection of health, welfare, safety and morals of the public.”
Establishes the legitimate basis and scope of zoning authority under police power
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceT. E. Duffey applied for a building permit from the City of West Palm Beach's Building Inspector to construct a dwelling in a residential subdivision.…
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 Zoning Ordinance Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellee sought a building permit from the Building Inspector of the City of West Palm Beach which was refused whereupon the appellee brought mandamus proceedings to compel issuance of such permit. From a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the issuance of the permit by the City and its Building Inspector, they appeal.
According to the answer of the appellants to an alternative writ of mandamus the basis for its refusal of a permit was as follows:
“... an examination of the plans and specifications showed, among other defects, that the building would contain only five small rooms, whereas every other home in the *864subdivision contained from seven to nine rooms; . . . because the department “cubed” the building, using the rate set out by ordinance for this purpose, and found that the cost of the building would approximate Five Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars ($5,500.00); because it was found upon examination of the plans submitted that the complete dwelling would not be of the intended character of appearance of the subdivision in which it would be located; because it would not substantially equal the adjacent buildings in square foot area, appearance or in height or in any other manner; . . . because the proposed building would not equal or compare favorably with any other residence in the general neighborhood over which this respondent has or has had any control in the issuing of building permits, as to size, appearance, costs or other characteristics.”
The appellee seems to have met all the lawful requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance No. 76 unless it be that he has not met the standards of Section 9 of Ordinance No. 76 as follows: •
“ . . . Further, the character and appearance of existing buildings or structures in said subdivision shall be considered, but in every new instance the completed appearance of every new building or structure must substantially equal that of the adjacent buildings or structures in said subdivision in appearance, square foot area and height.”
Zoning is an exercise of police power and ordinarily the exercise of such power in zoning has relation to structural qualities and the use of structures when considered in reference to the protection of health, welfare, safety and morals of the public. When regulations are to be imposed in order to promote health, welfare, safety and morals it is necessary that exactions be fixed in the ordinance with such certainty that they not be left to the whim or caprice of the administrative agency and the ordinance must have some relation to a lawful purpose — to promote health, welfare, safety and morals. We hold the quoted portion of the Ordinance void.
We find no'error and the judgment appealed is affirmed.
THOMAS, G. J., BUFORD, CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Merritt v. Peters, 65 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 1953)…ertainty that they not be left to the whim or caprice of the administrative agency; also, the ordinance must have some relation to .a lawful purpose — to promote health, welfare, safety or morals. See City of West Palm Beach v. State ex rel. Duffey, 158 Fla. 863, 30 So. 2d 491. When a regulation has no substantial relation to the public needs within the police power and at the same time restricts the use of private property such regulation must fall. The regulation fixing the size of a sign, based solely o…
-
Lewis v. Fla. State Bd. OF Health, 143 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…son v. Baldwin, 124 Fla. 233, 168 So. 255, 256 (1936). . Robbins v. Webb’s Cut Rate Drug Co., 153 Fla. 822, 16 So. 2d 121 (1944). . Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Anderson, 74 So. 2d 544, 547 (Fla.1954); City of West Palm Beach v. State ex rel. Duffey, 158 Fla. 863, 30 So. 2d 491, 492 (1947). . Except Barrow v. Holland, Footnote 3, which involved constitutional powers as previously discussed. . Bailey v. Van Pelt, 78 Fla. 337, 82 So. 789 (1919). . State ex rel. Davis v. Fowler, Footnote 7. . Ex parte Lewis…
-
City OF Coral Gables v. Sakolsky, 215 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…t limitation must be specific and must promote the health, welfare, safety, and morals of the public in order to be valid and withstand an attack upon it as an unwarranted exercise of that power. See City of West Palm Beach v. State [ex rel Duffey,] 158 Fla. 863, 30 So. 2d 491. Or stated more generally, a statute or ordinance varying the maximum height of buildings according to the portion of the city in which the building is located is valid and constitutional if it is well calculated to promote the genera…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence