City of Naples v. Central Plaza of Naples, Inc.

• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: GRIMES; McNULTY, C.J., and SIDWELL, BENJAMIN C.
• Citation: City of Naples v. Central Plaza of Naples, Inc., 303 So.2d 423 (Fla. App. 1974)
• Decision Date: 08 November 1974
• Docket Number: No. 74--752,74--752
• Parties: CITY OF NAPLES, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. CENTRAL PLAZA OF NAPLES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

Page 423

303 So.2d 423

CITY OF NAPLES, a municipal corporation of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. CENTRAL PLAZA OF NAPLES, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 74--752.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 8, 1974.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 11, 1974.

Charles K. Allan, City Atty., Naples, for appellant.

Thomas E. Maloney, Naples, and George L. Hollahan, Miami, for appellee.

GRIMES, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order directing the City of Naples to grant a special exception to the City Zoning Code so as to permit the appellee to construct certain multifamily housing.

Appellee is the owner of an essentially square piece of property which is located between the Gordon River and Goodlette Road in the City of Naples. The property protrudes into the river to the extent that it is bordered by water on three sides. A large shopping center fronting west on Goodlette Road occupies the bulk of the property. Appellee desires to build three four-story multifamily residences on the balance of the property which faces the river. According to the plans, access to the residential complex would be directly into Goodlette Road by means of a boulevard built along the north edge of the property so that there would be no direct vehicle access between the residential area and the shopping center. A row of pine trees would serve as a buffer between the shopping center and the apartments. The appellee agreed to limit permanent residency in the units to persons over the age of sixteen years.

Appellee's entire property is zoned K-a Industrial. The ordinance provides that as a special exception in this zone multiple family residences 'may be permitted by the City Council after a joint public hearing with due public notice has been held and a recommendation from the Planning Board has been submitted to the City Council.' Appellee filed a petition for a special exception and provided the necessary supporting documents. A joint public hearing was held by the Planning Board and the Naples City Council, at which time there was comprehensive discussion concerning the advisability of granting the exception. Ultimately, the Planning Board by a vote of four to one recommended approval of the exception. Three of the six members of the Council present voted in favor of the exception; the other three voted against it. Upon the advice of the City Attorney, the Mayor declared that the motion for approval had failed by virtue of the tie vote. ¹

Appellee thereafter filed suit seeking a variety of remedies including declaratory relief and a mandatory injunction. The parties agreed to allow the court to decide the case solely upon the transcript of the testimony taken at the joint public hearing and certain exhibits which were stipulated into evidence. The court found that the City's evidence did not substantially controvert the evidence presented by appellee. Concluding that the question of whether to grant the petition was not fairly debatable, the court held that the denial of the petition was arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious.

With respect to special exceptions, the City Zoning Code provides:

'(C) Standards: Prior to granting a special exception, the Planning Board and City Council shall find that the proposed special exception is necessary and/or appropriate to the area in which it is proposed, that it will be reasonably compatible with surrounding uses; that any nuisance or hazardous feature involved is...