Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/07/2005

Home

June 25, 2005 -- Page 5 reduce church activities. Finally, there was no evidence to suggest the denial was motivated by religious intolerance. Nothing in the record suggested that requiring the church to submit a new application would pressure the church to forgo or modify expression of reli- gious belief. Moreover, the hardships imposed on the church were likely to be relatively short-lived. see also: Wesrchester Day School v. V~IIage of Mamaroneck, 386 F. 3d 183 (2004). see also: San Jose Christian College v. City of Morgan Hill, 360 F. 3d 1024 (2004). .. Zoning Violation m Landowner runs unlawful party business for several years Claitns county cannot stop him Citation: Miami-Dare County v. Fernandez, CQurt of Appeal of Florida, 3rd Dist., No. 3D04-2842 (2005) FLORIDA (05/11/05) -- For several years, Fernandez.conducted a commer- cial, for~profit party business on his land. In July 2001, a neighbor complained to the county that the business created excessive noise and automobile traf- fic in the neighborhood. Fernandez's property was in an agricultural district. No part of the zoning code authorized Fernandez to use his property as a commercial party location. The county cited Fernandez for zoning violations. Fernandez continued to use his property for his party business. The county sued to enjoin Fernandez in 2004, and the court ruled in Femandez's favor. I.t found the county had "sat on its rights" and could no longer seek a court order prohibiting the parties. The county appealed. DECISION: Reversed. The county did not sit on its rights, and it was entitled to the court order. The county sought to remediate unlawful activities going on since at least July 2001. The fact Fernandez was seeking variances to engage in the prohibited activity, without success, further suggested the county did not sit on its rights. Fernandez admitted he had been operating a business without complying with the county code. When-the county' 'cited him, it was focusing on past' conduct. By seeking a court order, the county was trying to stop furore viola- tions of the code. Until Fernandez obtained the appropriate certificates of Use, he would continue to violate the code. It was clear the county was permitted to enjoin such unlawful conduct. · Finally, Fernandez complained the local government bureaucracy did not 2005 Quinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 5424048. · 105