WARREN SERVATT, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 denial of a zoning variance was affirmed because the applicant failed to demonstrate unnecessary hardship.
Warren Servatt applied for a zoning variance for his property, which was denied by the Zoning Appeals Board and the County Commission. The circuit cou…
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 Unnecessary Hardship cases and more on FLexlaw
Warren Servatt is the owner of real property in Dade County. He made application for a zoning variance which was denied by the Zoning Appeals Board. The County Commission sustained the denial. Thereupon Servatt filed his petition for certiorari in the circuit court. When his petition was denied he brought this appeal.
The points presented by the appellant each urge that it was unreasonable to deny him the variance he sought because of the character of the development surrounding his land. He argues that the site is admirably suited for a filling station and no one except the county objects. These arguments do not authorize this Court to reverse the denial of certiorari in the circuit court.
The appellant has not sought a change of zoning classification, nor has he attacked the constitutionality of the zoning as applied to his property. He has in effect admitted the validity of the zoning by applying for a variance. City of Miami v. Stegemann, Fla.App.1964, 158 So.2d 583.
The appellant as petitioner for cer-tiorari in the circuit court failed to show an unnecessary hardship. The circuit court correctly denied the petition. Board of Adjustment of City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Kremer, Fla.App.1962, 139 So.2d 448.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kugel v. City OF Miami Beach, 206 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…cine from an office in the building. The building has been used partly as a doctor’s office since that time. It is urged that the doctrine of estoppel set out in Josephson v. Autrey, Fla.1957, 96 So. 2d 784, and Servatt v. Dade County, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 175 bars appellants from relief; that is, the appellants, having received a variance thus affirm the ordinance and may not question the validity of the ordinance as it applies to their property. This principle cannot be applied to the present action bec…
-
BAL Harbour Vill. v. State of Fla. ex rel. V. E. Giblin, 299 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…ct affirmatively appears from the exhibits attached to the return of the writ. We have held that in seeking a. variance from the requirements of an ordinance, the validity of the ordinance is generally admitted. Servatt v. Dade County, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 175; City of Miami v. Stegemann, Fla. App.1964, 158 So. 2d 583. The cited opinions stand for the proposition that a proceeding seeking a variance admits the validity of the ordinance for that proceeding. We do not hold that an application for a variance…
-
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Brennan, 802 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…Dade County’s unincorporated area. See, e.g., Rayan Corp. v. Board, of County Commissioners of Dade County, 356 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Burger King Corp. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 349 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Servatt v. Dade County, 173 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Dade County v. Frank N’ Bun Operating Co., 169 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). Notwithstanding that the unnecessary hardship standard applied to all variances, whether use or non-use, in Hemisphere Equity Realty v. Key Biscayne Pr…
Authorities Cited
- Bd. OF Adjustment OF City OF Fort Lauderdale v. Kremer, 139 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- The City OF Miami v. Stegemann, 158 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)