Mandelstam v. City Commission

26 Fla. Supp. 2d 163
CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida
DecidedJanuary 11, 1988
DocketCase No. 87-063 AP
StatusPublished

This text of 26 Fla. Supp. 2d 163 (Mandelstam v. City Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mandelstam v. City Commission, 26 Fla. Supp. 2d 163 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1988).

Opinions

OPINION OF THE COURT

This appeal is from the City’s denial of Appellants’ application for a special use permit to construct and operate a gymnastics training center or “school” in a residentially zoned neighborhood.

[164]*164Appellants urge that the City Zoning Ordinance allows the construction and operation of “schools” in residential areas upon issuance of a special permit; that Appellants satisfied the requirements of the Environmental Review Board and Planning Board, which approved the application, as well as the requirements of the planned development section of the zoning ordinance.

At the hearing before the City Council, Appellants offered the testimony of experts that the requirements of the planned development section of the ordinance had been satisfied. The City did not rebut that showing and Appellants argue that they were entitled to the permit as a matter of law.

If the gymnastics training center was a “school” as contemplated by the ordinance, then Appellants are entitled to their permit.

The Ordinance (16-22-1) provides in part:

* * *
“The following uses and structures shall be permitted generally:.....
(b) Schools, public and private.”
(d) Noncommercial, social, recreational and cultural facilities.....”
* * *
No definition of school is provided.
Section 10-1-1.05 provides that definitions shall be in accordance with dictionary meaning.
Appellants argue that Webster’s defines “school” as “a place of discipline or training” and that they propose to teach a discipline, that of gymnastics.
Appellee suggests other definitions listed in Webster’s which are more traditional.
In Wadsworth v. Board of Adjustment of Bedminster Township, 78 A.2d 619 (N.J. Super. 1951), the New Jersey Court said:
* * *
“.....the words ‘private school’ in the zoning ordinance of the defendant township are used in their traditional sense and not in any all embracing sense and are intended to describe that class of school which is purely academic in character.....”
* * *

[165]*165We are persuaded by the rationale of Wadworth (supra) and the City’s action denying the permit is therefore affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of Miami Beach v. 100 Lincoln Road, Inc.
214 So. 2d 39 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Gilden Appeal
178 A.2d 562 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1962)
Wadsworth v. BD. OF ADJUSTMENT, BEDMINSTER TP.
78 A.2d 619 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Fla. Supp. 2d 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mandelstam-v-city-commission-flacirct-1988.