69 F. Supp. 3d 1299
M.D. Fla.2014Background
- Church of Our Savior (Anglican) sought to buy three parcels in Jacksonville Beach (RS-1 residential) to build a ~7,440–9,500 sq ft church to serve ~200 congregants; current worship space (Beaches Museum Chapel) is limited and leased short-term.
- Under the City Land Development Code (LDC) religious organizations in RS-1 required Conditional Use Permits (CUPs); parks/playgrounds were originally permitted as-of-right in RS-1 until a 2014 amendment reclassified them as conditional uses.
- The Church submitted two CUP applications (March and August 2013). City planning staff recommended approval both times; the Planning Commission denied both applications after neighborhood opposition focused on traffic, compatibility, and property values.
- After denial the Church filed suit under RLUIPA alleging violations of the Substantial Burden, Equal Terms (facial and as-applied), and Unreasonable Limitations provisions; the City amended the LDC two days before trial (Sept. 15, 2014).
- At trial the Court found no substantial burden under RLUIPA § 2000cc(a), found the Church’s facial Equal Terms claim moot due to the LDC amendment, but ruled for the Church on its as-applied Equal Terms claim (selective treatment) and against the Church on the Unreasonable Limitations claim.
- Remedy: Court directed the City to grant a CUP for the Property, but allowed the City to impose reasonable conditions consistent with the LDC; the Court retained jurisdiction to resolve remaining implementation issues and fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of the CUP imposed a "substantial burden" on religious exercise under RLUIPA § 2000cc(a) | Denial prevents Church from using the Property and forces continued constrained worship at the leased chapel; no less-restrictive alternatives were adequate | Denial does not coerce abandonment of religious precepts; burden arises from market/pricing, not the City; CUP denial is routine zoning process | Denied — Court: no substantial burden; marketplace limits and available zones meant Church not forced to forsake religious exercise |
| Facial Equal Terms challenge to LDC (religious uses conditional vs. parks permitted) | LDC treated religious assemblies worse than secular assemblies; ordinance violated RLUIPA on its face | City amended LDC to reclassify parks as conditional, removing facial disparity; therefore claim is moot | Moot — Court: 2014 Amendment removed the challenged statutory disparity; facial claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| As-applied Equal Terms (selective enforcement) — whether a secular comparator was similarly situated | The Church identified Discovery Montessori School (private school) as a similarly situated nonreligious assembly that received a CUP | City argued differences in time, location, intensity, and other dissimilarities | Granted for Church — Court: Discovery Montessori was a sufficiently similar comparator; Commission treated them differently and City failed to show denial was narrowly tailored to a compelling interest |
| Unreasonable Limitations (whether City’s rules unreasonably limit where religious institutions may locate) | Denials coupled with cost barriers effectively prevent Church from locating within the city | City noted many churches operate in city and religious uses remain permitted by right or as conditional uses across much of the city | Denied — Court: no evidence the City broadly limited religious assemblies; economics and market availability are relevant and LDC does not unreasonably bar religious institutions |
Key Cases Cited
- Midrash Sephardi, Inc. v. Town of Surfside, 366 F.3d 1214 (11th Cir.) (defines "substantial burden" in land-use context; routine zoning requirements generally not substantial burdens)
- Primera Iglesia Bautista Hispana of Boca Raton, Inc. v. Broward Cnty., 450 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir.) (framework for prima facie Equal Terms showing and burdens of proof)
- Covenant Christian Ministries, Inc. v. City of Marietta, Ga., 654 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir.) (mootness doctrine in RLUIPA facial challenges where municipality amends ordinance to remove challenged disparity)
- Konikov v. Orange Cnty., Fla., 410 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir.) (treatment of zoning/CUP in RLUIPA context)
- Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709 (U.S.) (upholding broad protection for religious exercise under federal law)
- Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2751 (U.S.) (RLUIPA-related principle: courts need not assess centrality of belief to invoke statutory protections)
- Vision Church v. Vill. of Long Grove, 468 F.3d 975 (7th Cir.) (Unreasonable Limitations analysis — consider actual availability of land and economics of religious organizations)