Opinion ID: 544797
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: analysis

Text: Contract Claims 17 CFP argues that the district court erred in determining that the agreement was unambiguous and in improperly weighing the evidence of intent, usurping the jury's function. 5 Lakes argues that the contract was unambiguous and that the trial testimony demonstrates that there was no issue regarding the parties' intent. 18 There are two types of site plans in the construction industry. A conceptual site plan shows no buildings or improvements. It is simply an outline of the property and surrounding areas together with a description of proposed density and use (e.g., commercial, industrial, or residential). A detailed site plan shows the actual locations of buildings, building elevations, setbacks, and other details of construction. Woodward Hampton, the City Manager for the City, testified that final approval of a detailed site plan is part of the process of applying for building permits. CFP's entire case consists of an attempt to blur the distinction between these two types of site plans. The agreement, however, makes clear that the parties intended Lakes to obtain approval only of a conceptual site plan. 19 Article Twelfth of the agreement provides the following definition of the term plan: 20 There has heretofore been prepared by [Lakes] a master plan entitled Conceptual Site Plan Pembroke Lakes Regional Center, dated May 24, 1985 and prepared by Gee & Jenson for the Land and peripheral area.... The plan and the criteria set forth in this paragraph A are collectively referred to as the Plan. 21 Every special condition set out in the following paragraph refers to the Plan, which clearly means the conceptual site plan prepared by Gee & Jenson. Accordingly, CFP's references to approvals of other types of site plans are irrelevant to the question of whether Lakes fulfilled the special closing conditions. 6 The special condition that CFP claims was not fulfilled (that Lakes obtain approval of the Plan by all governmental authorities having jurisdiction) obligated Lakes to obtain approval only of the conceptual site plan. CFP's counsel conceded at oral argument that the city approved this plan. 7 Accordingly, Lakes fulfilled the special closing conditions. 22 CFP nevertheless argues that the testimony at trial established without contradiction that the parties intended approval of the conceptual site plan to be sufficient to obtain detailed site plan approval, leading to the issuance of building permits. Because the conceptual site plan was not sufficient to obtain detailed site plan approval, CFP argues, Lakes had an obligation to submit more detailed plans for approval. 23 The testimony at trial did not support CFP's theory of the parties' intent. Kraus was CFP's attorney during the negotiations. He testified that the conceptual site plan would not be adequate for detailed site plan approval in any jurisdiction. Cadillac's Vice President in charge of the project was David Schwartz. Schwartz had been involved in twelve shopping center developments for Cadillac. He testified that he did not know of any jurisdiction where a developer could obtain site plan approval, for the purposes of obtaining building permits, by submitting a plan, such as the conceptual site plan, that showed no buildings. In sum, the evidence is overwhelming that the parties knew that building permits could not be obtained on the basis of the conceptual site plan, which was the only plan for which Lakes was obligated to seek approvals. Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not err in determining that no reasonable person could find that the parties intended that Lakes obtain final site plan approval. 24 CFP also argues that because municipal approval procedures in the city did not include any mechanism for approving the conceptual site plan, Lakes did not obtain the approvals called for in Article Twelfth. CFP, however, does not indicate what approval Lakes failed to obtain. The City Manager and City Planner testified that the conceptual site plan was approved under Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 380.06, which provides for municipal approval of developments of regional impact. Municipal law did not provide for any other types of municipal approvals of the conceptual site plan. Accordingly, Lakes did obtain all required municipal approvals. 8