HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PETITIONER,
v.
LEONARD V. LONGO, RESPONDENT
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.
Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners sought certiorari review of a circuit court order that overturned the Board's zoning decision denying a property owner's request to rezone from residential to commercial use. The appellate court granted certiorari, finding the circuit court erred in determining the Board acted arbitrarily and capriciously when substantial competent evidence supported the Board's decision to follow planning agency recommendations over the hearing master's recommendation.
The Board of County Commissioners did not act arbitrarily and capriciously because substantial, competent evidence supported its decision. The hearing master's recommendation was not binding, and since the issue was fairly debatable, the commissioners had the authority to reject it and follow the planning agencies' alternative recommendation.
[1] A county board of commissioners has the authority to reject a zoning hearing master's recommendation when there is substantial, competent evidence to support the board's…
[2] A circuit court should grant certiorari review when a lower tribunal's order departs from the essential requirements of law.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We agree with petitioner that there was substantial, competent evidence to support the decision of the Board of County Commissioners.”
Establishes the standard for reviewing administrative zoning decisions and finds the Board's decision supported by adequate evidence.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeonard Longo owned 1.59 acres zoned residential (R-1) on Ehrlich Road in Hillsborough County. He sought to rezone the property to commercial (C-P) to…
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 Arbitrary And Capricious Action cases and more on FLexlaw
Hillsborough County seeks certiorari review of a circuit court order which overturned a zoning decision of the Board of County Commissioners. We agree that the circuit court’s order represents a departure from the essential requirements of law and grant the petition for certiorari.
Respondent Longo is the owner of 1.59 acres of land on Ehrlich Road in Hillsbor-ough County. The parcel is presently zoned “R-l” (residential), a usage which all parties would probably agree is no longer appropriate. Longo sought to rezone the land from “R-l” to “C-P” (commercial) in order to construct a small shopping plaza. Zoning experts from the county’s department of development coordination and the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission objected to the requested change, primarily because they believed it would contribute to “strip commercialization” in the area. They suggested that a viable alternative might be to rezone the property “I-P,” which would allow the construction of office space. Both bodies made their positions known to the zoning hearing master assigned to make a recommendation in the case. The master, however, recommended approval of Longo’s application. In so doing, he noted that surrounding properties already zoned “I-P” remained vacant, indicating a probable overabundance of office space that would militate against Longo developing his property for the same purpose.
The matter then went before the Board of County Commissioners for its decision. The members of the board voted unanimously to follow the recommendations of the two planning agencies rather than that of the zoning hearing master. Longo filed a petition for certiorari in the circuit court. The court held that the commissioners acted arbitrarily and capriciously in refusing to accept the master’s recommendation. The court then ordered the property rezoned from “R-l” to “C-P.”
We agree with petitioner that there was substantial, competent evidence to support the decision of the Board of County Commissioners. Although the hearing master favored the position taken by Longo, the other agencies did not, and those agencies gave reasons for their opposition. The master’s recommendation was not binding on the commissioners, and since the issue was fairly debatable the commissioners had the authority to reject the recommendation. Hillsborough County v. Putney, 495 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Sarasota County v. Purser, 476 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Hillsborough County v. Westshore Realty, Inc., 444 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
The petition for certiorari is hereby granted, the order of the circuit court is quashed, and this case is remanded with directions to reinstate the decision of the Board of County Commissioners.
DANAHY, C.J., and RYDER and FRANK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Fuller, 515 So. 2d 1312 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…fkowicz, 389 So. 2d at 1041. Applying this standard, a careful examination of the record presented to the commission contains ample evidence — in the form of staff recommendations for approval, see Hillsborough County Bd. of County Comm’rs v. Longo, 505 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Walker v. Indian River County, 319 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), and otherwise5— to support the conclusion that the public interest would not be disserved and the consequent decision to grant the application. City of Hollywood…
-
The City OF Tampa v. Lili Madison, 508 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…was fairly debatable and that the city council’s decision was, in fact, supported by substantial competent evidence. The city council’s decision, therefore, should not have been overturned. Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners v. Longo, 505 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Hillsborough County v. Westshore Realty, Inc., 444 So. 2d 25 (Fla.2d DCA 1983). The petition for writ of certiorari is hereby granted, the order of the circuit court is quashed, and this case is remanded with directions to reins…
-
Cacciatore v. Hillsborough Cnty., 523 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…ing this matter to our attention would have been by a petition for writ of certiorari. Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(2)(B). City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1982). See also Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners v. Longo, 505 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Sarasota County v. Purser, 476 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We, therefore, treat this appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and hold the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law in either sub…
Authorities Cited
- Hillsborough Cnty. v. Putney, 495 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Hillsborough Cnty. v. Westshore Realty, Inc., 444 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Sarasota Cnty. v. Purser, 476 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)