Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 07 10 HAND OUT Development Definitions CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS PLANNING & ZONING BOARD/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY JULY 10, 2007 THE ATTACHED WAS GIVEN TO THE BOARD MEMBERS BY MS. ELOISE SAHLSTROM, SENIOR PLANNER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .. SPOT ZONING .~ . TheA Illustrated Book of By HARVEY S. MOSKOWITZ and CARL G. UNDBLOOM Rezoning of a lot or parcel of land to benefit an owner for a use incompatible with surrounding land uses and that does not further the comprehensive zoning plan. Comment: Spot zoning per se may not be illegal; it may only be descriptive of a certain set of facts and conse- quently neutral with respect to whether it is valid or invalid. Hagman (1975) states that spot zoning is invalid only when all the following factors are present: (1) a small parcel of land is singled out for special and privi- leged treatment; (2) the singling out is not in the public interest but only for the benefit of the land owner; and (3) the, action is not in accord with a comprehensive plan. See Kozesnik's v. Twp. of Montgomery, 24 N.J. 154, 131 A2 1 (1957); Borough of Cress kill v. Borough of Dumont, 15 N.J. 238, 104 A2d 441 (1954); and Jones v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Long Beach Twp., 32 N.J. Super. 397, 108,498 (1954). PCJ Article: "Understanding Spot Zoning," by Robert C. Widner - Page I of2 Planners Web PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL Read excerpts from more than 275 articles; most are available to download Understanding Spot Zoning by Robert C. Widner, Esq. "Understanding Spot Zoning" is included in our TakiugaCIQs~r LQQk:J>lamlingJ",a:w "Primer collection of articles from the Planning Commissioners J oumal. The booklet is delivered by I st class mail. AVQl.ltthG.Al.llhQI From Issue 13 of the PO, Winter 1994 &iJ Most planning commissioners have heard the impassioned cry that a particular rezoning decision will constitute an invalid "spot zoning." . This allegation typically arises where the community is considering the rezoning of a single lot or small parcel of property held by a single owner and the rezoning will permit land uses not available to the adjacent property. Because spot zoning often focuses on the single parcel without considering the broader context, that is, the area and land uses surrounding the parcel, it is commonly considered the antithesis of planned zoning. While rezoning decisions that only affect a single parcel or small amount of land are most often the subj ect of spot zoning claims (as opposed to rezonings oflarger areas), a locality can lawfully rezone a single parcel if its action is shown to be consistent with the community's land use policies. As I will discuss shortly, courts look to the community's comprehensive plan, or to other planning studies, in determining whether the rezoning is, in fact, consistent with local land use policies. Of course, whether a particular rezoning constitutes an unlawful spot zoning depends largely upon the facts surrounding the zoning decision and upon the judicial decisions of each state. However, courts commonly note that the underlying question is whether the zoning decision advances the health, safety, and welfare of the community. A zoning decision that merely provides for individual benefit without a relationship to public benefit cannot be legally supported. Where a particular zoning decision is not supported by a public purpose, the zoning decision is arbitrary and may be subject to invalidation as unlawful spot zoning. http://www.plannersweb.com/articles/wid060 .html 7/l 012007 PCJ Article: "Understanding Spot Zoning," by Robert C. Widner Page 2 of2 ... Although courts throughout the nation differ in their specific approaches when reviewing spot zoning claims, the majority consider: 1. the size of the parcel subject to rezoning; 2. the zoning both prior to and after the local government's decision; 3. the existing zoning and use of the adjacent properties; 4. the benefits and detriments to the landowner, neighboring property owners, and the community resulting from the rezoning; and 5. the relationship between the zoning change and the local government's stated land use policies and objectives. This last factor -- the relationship of the rezoning decision to the community's land use policies and objectives --is perhaps the most important one. As a result, when a planning commission (or governing body) initially considers a rezoning request it should determine whether the request is consistent with the comprehensive or master plan. Many communities' zoning codes also require a separate planning study that examines the merits of the proposed rezoning. This further ensures that any rezoning is consistent with the community's land use objectives, and not a case of spot zoning. The bottom line is that courts will give considerable weight to evidence that the locality's rezoning decision reflects thoughtful consideration of planning factors. It should be noted that there is one situation where a rezoning decision that does not conform to the comprehensive plan may nevertheless be upheld. That is where there is evidence showing significant changes in the community since the adoption of the plan that would justify a rezoning of the property. This is especially true where a review of other factors, such as benefit to the community and the size of the rezoned parcel, indicate that the rezoning was not merely intended to confer a benefit to the property owner. Please note that this article is copyright protected by the Planning Commissioners Journal. You are welcome to download or print the article for your own personal use -- or to provide a link to this article from another Web site. For other use of the article, please contact the Planning Commissioners Journal. Planners Web PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL http://www.plannersweb.comlarticles/wid060 .html 7/1 0/2007