Czech v. City of Blaine, 46481
| Decision Date | 15 April 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 46481,46481 |
| Citation | 253 N.W.2d 272,312 Minn. 535 |
| Parties | Lyle CZECH, Respondent, v. CITY OF BLAINE, Appellant. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
The determination that a mobile home zoning ordinance was unconstitutional was improper. The facts of the case compel a conclusion that the action of the city council in refusing to rezone the subject property to permit mobile home construction was an unconstitutional taking of property.
The judgment of the lower court is vacated and the matter remanded to the district court with instructions to enter judgment consistent with this opinion.
Sweeney & O'Connor, and Thomas M. Sweeney, St. Paul, for appellant.
Wurst, Bundlie, Carroll & Crouch, Gerald T. Carroll, Jr., and Albert Faulconer III, Minneapolis, for respondent.
Heard before ROGOSHESKE, KELLY and TODD, JJ., and considered and decided by the court en banc.
Respondent Lyle Czech is the owner of a mobile home park in the city of Blaine. In 1973 he acquired property immediately adjacent to his site and sought a special-use permit to use the acquired site as a mobile home park. He obtained all necessary preliminary approvals, but at a meeting of the Blaine City Council he discovered that the Blaine ordinances required rezoning. Czech applied for rezoning, obtained all preliminary approvals, but his application for rezoning was rejected. Czech commenced action against Blaine alleging the action of the city council was capricious and illegal, and challenging the constitutionality of Blaine Ordinance No. 163. The trial court held the ordinance unconstitutional, treated the matter as an application for a special-use permit, and ordered Blaine to issue such a permit. We decline to affirm on the grounds stated by the trial court, but do conclude that Blaine's refusal to rezone constituted an unconstitutional taking of Czech's property under the facts of this case.
In 1970, Czech purchased a parcel of land in Blaine. Since the land was zoned B-3, he operated a mobile home park on the property by virtue of a special-use permit obtained by the preceding owner. Thereafter, Czech acquired additional property immediately west of his present mobile home park which was also zoned B-3. Czech purchased the property for the specific purpose of expanding his mobile home park on the new site. He contacted the city building inspector who informed him that a special-use permit would have to be obtained in order to operate a mobile home park on the acquired site. Czech completed a special-use permit application and submitted it to the planning commission in July 1973. The application was accompanied by all the data required by Blaine city ordinances and included approval of the application by the police and fire departments as well as the watershed district. The only person to voice an objection to Czech's permit request at a September 1973 public hearing was the mayor of Lexington, a neighboring community of Blaine. His objection to Czech's application related to the capacity of the sewer line which would service the trailer park. Despite the objection, the planning commission unanimously approved the application in a subsequent meeting.
The Blaine City Council held a public hearing on Czech's application on December 6, 1973. At this hearing a person in the audience called the city council's attention to the fact that the Blaine city ordinances were amended in 1968 to establish an R-4 district for mobile home parks in the city. However, in December 1973, every mobile home park in the city was located in a B-3 district and operated by virtue of a special-use permit. Also, at the time of Czech's hearing there was not one parcel of land within the city zoned as R-4. 1 In reaction to the information it received concerning the 1968 amendment, the council declined to act on the application for a special-use permit.
In response to the inaction of the city council, Czech immediately completed and filed a petition to rezone his new site from B-3 to R-4. He again appeared before the planning commission with all the necessary data and approvals. At this public hearing no one appeared in opposition to his application. On January 17, 1974, Czech once again found himself in front of the Blaine City Council where his petition to rezone the property was denied by a three-to-one vote, with one abstention. No reasons were stated for the denial, but the minutes of the meeting reflect a concern over sewer capacity. Czech's attorney appeared at a March 1974 meeting of the council where the minutes state that two of the three councilmen voting against the rezoning stated their reasons for denying approval.
Shortly thereafter, Czech brought action against the city of Blaine seeking in the alternative (1) that Ordinance No. 163, which amended the Blaine city zoning ordinance and established R-4 districts for mobile home parks, be declared unconstitutional; (2) that the city be ordered to rezone his property from B-3 to R-4; or (3) damages.
At trial, the evidence disclosed that the subject site is located in an area of high water tables. The property is bounded on the east by Czech's present mobile home park and on the west by another trailer park. The city of Lexington abuts the south side of the property while the land north of the subject site is zoned for multiple dwelling and light industry. A judicial ditch runs between Czech's present mobile home park and his proposed site to provide for drainage of surface waters.
The city council members were called as witnesses in the trial. Two of the members who voted to deny rezoning gave as reasons for their vote the problems of (1) the high water table; (2) the sewer capacity; and (3) surface water drainage. Although admitting to have read professional engineering reports which were contradictory to their position, they nevertheless relied on their personal judgment and observation concerning the site to reach the conclusion that the sewer and drainage...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wensmann Realty, Inc. v. City of Eagan, A05-1074.
...quo. We have recognized that such status quo decision-making can result in an unconstitutional taking. Czech v. City of Blaine, 312 Minn. 535, 536-39, 253 N.W.2d 272, 273-74 (1977). But under the city's proposed method, the government could effectively force a property owner to maintain an ......
-
Rains v. Washington Dept. of Fisheries, 44630
...Reclamation Board, 205 Cal.App.2d 734, 23 Cal.Rptr. 428 (1962); Tuggle v. Manning, 224 Ga. 29, 159 S.E.2d 703 (1968); Czech v. City of Blaine, Minn., 253 N.W.2d 272 (1977); Metzger v. Town of Brentwood, N.H., 374 A.2d 954 (1977); Vernon Park Realty, Inc. v. City of Mount Vernon, 307 N.Y. 49......
-
County of Ramsey v. Stevens
...issuance of mobile home permits, an action that can be construed as taking under certain circumstances. See, e. g., Czech v. City of Blaine, 253 N.W.2d 272 (Minn.1977). While it is true that Lilydale refused to permit new development, including the filling of lowlands and issuance of mobile......
-
McGann v. City Council of City of Laramie
...zones should be drawn." When a city council takes action on a rezoning application, it exercises a legislative power. Czech v. City of Blaine, Minn.1977, 253 N.W.2d 272. Although that majority position has been questioned, particularly as it applies to rezoning or zoning amendments, the con......
-
Castles-and Roads-in the Sand: Do All Roads Lead to a 'Taking'?
...fee, based on the owner’s failure to submit a plan to return the building to appropriate oc-cupancy, did not constitute a taking).87. 253 N.W.2d 272, 275 (Minn. 1977).88. Id.89. Id.90. is is also true in Florida: see, e.g., Alexander v. Town of Jupiter, 640 So. 2d 79, 82 (Fla. Dist. Ct. Ap......