Rural New Town, Inc. v. Palm Beach County

• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: MAGER; CROSS, J., and MARKO, PAUL M., III
• Citation: Rural New Town, Inc. v. Palm Beach County, 315 So.2d 478 (Fla. App. 1975)
• Decision Date: 27 June 1975
• Docket Number: No. 74--1368,74--1368
• Parties: RURAL NEW TOWN, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee.

Page 478

315 So.2d 478

RURAL NEW TOWN, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 74--1368.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 27, 1975.

Andrew I. Friedrich and Louis R. McBane, O'Connell & Cooper, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

R. William Rutter, Jr., County Atty., and Lawrence J. Langer, Asst. County Atty., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

MAGER, Judge.

This is an appeal by Rural New Town, Inc., appellant-petitioner, from an order denying a petition for writ of certiorari addressed to Palm Beach County, appellee-respondent. ¹

The appellant previously filed an application seeking rezoning of certain property from agriculture to residential and the granting of a special exception in order to allow a planned unit development on such property. The application was first considered by the Palm Beach County Planning and Zoning Commission which recommended that the project as proposed be denied.

After an extensive public hearing before the Palm Beach County Commission, appellee, at which considerable testimony and documentary evidence was presented the appellant's application was denied. It is from that denial that the appellant filed its petition for certiorari before the Circuit Court; and it is from the Circuit Court's denial of appellant's petition that the instant appeal was taken to this court.

Upon review of the transcript of the proceedings contained in the record and after due consideration of the applicable legal authorities we are of the opinion that the appellant met its burden in proving that the issue, i.e. to rezone from agriculture to residential, was Not fairly debatable; and that the appellee failed to rebut by competent substantial evidence the overwhelming proof adduced by the appellant the property should be rezoned from agriculture to residential. Stokes v. City of Jacksonville, Fla.App.1973,276 So.2d 200; City of St. Petersburg v. Aikin, Fla.1968, 217 So.2d 315; Hall v. Korth, Fla.App.1971, 244 So.2d 766; City of Miami v. Schutte, Fla.App.1972, 262 So.2d 14; cf. Metropolitan Dade County v. Kanter, Fla.App.1967, 200 So.2d 624; McCormick v. City of Pensacola, Fla.App.1968,216 So.2d 785.

No useful purpose would be served by detailing the evidence presented to the Palm Beach County Commission. Suffice it to say, that the quality and character of the evidence presented by appellant was of such magnitude as to remove the continued applicability of the existing zoning classification from the 'fairly debatable' category thus rendering further enforcement of that classification arbitrary, unreasonable or confiscatory.

We are not unmindful of the principle that while ownership of real property carries with it the right to use such property for any lawful purpose, such use is not unbridled; reasonable zoning regulations may be imposed under the police power of the governing authority in furtherance of the health, safety and welfare of the community at large. City of Miami v. Schutte, Supra. Additionally, we recognize that when the application of a zoning regulation and the continued enforcement thereof becomes a 'fairly debatable' issue, that is to say, if the regulation makes sense in its application and enforcement, then the determination made by the governing body on the issue of whether or not to rezone becomes a legislative determination with which the courts will not interfere. See City of Miami Beach v. Lachman, Fla.1953, 71 So.2d 148.

The burden is Not upon the governing authority to approve or establish by competent substantial evidence that the zoning regulation or classification is reasonable or is in furtherance of its police power; the very adoption of that regulation creates a presumption of reasonableness and debatability. On the contrary, the burden rests upon the applicant to...