JEMCO MASTERCRAFT HOMES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., 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 court affirmed the denial of certiorari review where a developer's request to rezone designated parkland for office construction was properly denied by the County Commission as neither arbitrary nor discriminatory.
A county commission's denial of a zoning change for property designated as parkland in an approved development plan is not arbitrary, unreasonable, or discriminatory merely because the owner seeks to develop it differently.
Appellant purchased undeveloped property designated as a village green or park in a residential development plan that had been approved by the County …
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 Law cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is from a judgment of the circuit court denying a petition for writ of certiorari. The appellant purchased undeveloped property from an original developer. The property had been designated as a “village green” or park in a residential development pursuant to a plan which was incorporated in an application for zoning changes before the County Commission. The zoning changes were granted based upon the representation that the plan would be followed. Residences, town houses, and apartment houses were built according to the plan, and thereafter appellant purchased the “village green” area. Appellant then petitioned the zoning authorities for a change of zoning and a variance to allow the construction of an office building. This requested change of zoning was denied at all levels of the county government and ultimately denied by the County Commission.
The circuit court was presented with a petition for writ of certiorari to review the action of the County Commission. The petition alleged that the action of the County Commission was “unreasonable, arbitrary and discriminatory”. The circuit court found, on the basis of the record, that the appellant failed to demonstrate the allegations of his petition. On this appeal, appellant presents the same arguments to us and we likewise find them without merit.
Since no error has been shown, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Naples v. Cent. Plaza OF Naples, Inc., 303 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)…ll not interfere with the decisions of zoning authorities acting in their administrative capacity unless such decisions are arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. E. g., Jemco Mastercraft Homes, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade Cty., Fla.App.3rd, 1972, 267 So. 2d 873. In support of its argument that there was a reasonable basis for the denial of appellee’s petition, the City points to the evidence presented which indicated that the erection of these apartments would substantially increase the amount of traffic t…
-
Jemco Mastercraft Homes, Inc. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 272 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1973)…Certiorari denied. 267 So. 2d 873. ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Kasser v. KE, 282 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…ible claims by other lot owners to the use of the area designated “PARK”. We recently held in a zoning case that resident owners had such a claim to a “village green” area. See Jemco Mastercraft Homes, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, Fla.App.1972, 267 So. 2d 873. Therefore, we hold that the judgment for the appellees is unsupported by competent evidence, and that the appellant’s proof that the title is uninsurable remains unrefuted. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded with direc…