final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lower
Tribunal No. 13-25997 Beatrice Butchko, Judge.
Lamb, Hall & Leto, P.A., and Andrew C. Hall, Matthew P.
Leto, and Roarke Maxwell, for appellant.
C. Lukacs, P.A., and John C. Lukacs, Sr.; Weiss Serota
Helfman Cole & Bierman, P.L., and Laura K. Wendell and
Susan L. Trevarthen, for appellees.
LOGUE, SCALES, and HENDON, JJ.
LLC, appeals the summary final judgment entered in favor of
the City of Coral Gables, the City of Coral Gables
Commission, and the Historic Preservation Board of the City
of Coral Gables (collectively, the "City"). On
appeal, we review whether the City's 2012 application of
a 1984 ordinance to the subject property gives rise to a
cause of action under the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private
Property Rights Protection Act. § 70.001, Fla. Stat.
Because the grandfather provision of the Harris Act expressly
bars claims that arise from the application of an ordinance
enacted on or before May 11, 1995, including when the
application of the ordinance occurs after that date, we
affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment
finding that Cascar did not have a cause of action under the
heart of this controversy is a historic residence located on
two acres of waterfront property in Coral Gables, Florida.
The residence was designed by architect Alfred Browning
Parker and the owner, noted philanthropist Beulah Carlin, in
1966. Several years after Ms. Carlin built her residence, the
City Commission created the Historic Preservation Board and
vested it with the power to designate properties as historic
landmarks. On August 28, 1984, in furtherance of its
preservation efforts, the City Commission enacted Ordinance
No. 2508. Coral Gables, Fla., Ordinance No. 2508 (Aug. 28,
1984), codified at Coral Gables Zoning Code, Art. III,
§§ 3-1103 & 3-1107(D). Ordinance No. 2508
promulgated preservation standards, review procedures, and
the criteria to determine, among other things, whether to
designate a landmark historic or to issue a demolition
Carlin passed away in 2007 and title to the property
transferred to Cascar. In 2012, the residence was designated
a historic landmark by resolution pursuant to Section 3-1103.
Cascar asserted that modern buyers found the residence
undesirable and requested a permit to demolish the residence,
but its request was denied by resolution pursuant Section
3-1107(D). The denial was based primarily on the
residence's designation as a historic landmark.
filed a Harris Act claim to recover for diminution of the
property's value allegedly caused by the refusal to allow
demolition of the historic residence. The City moved for
summary judgment and submitted the affidavit of Historic
Preservation Officer Donna Spain, in support of its motion.
Her uncontested affidavit stated the designation and the
denial of the application to demolish were based on Ordinance
2508 as codified:
6. In designating the property as a local historic landmark,
the Historic Preservation Board and the City Commission
applied the criteria for designation of historic landmarks
which appear in the Coral Gables Zoning Code at Article III,
7. The criteria that appear in Section 3-1103 were in effect
in the City since the City enacted Ordinance No. 2508 on
August 28, 1984.
9. In denying Cascar's application [for a demolition
permit], the Historic Preservation Board and the City
Commission considered the record and applied the criteria set
forth in the Coral Gables Zoning Code, Article III, Section