Keppy v. Ehlers
| Decision Date | 08 May 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 50594,50594 |
| Citation | 253 Iowa 1021,115 N.W.2d 198 |
| Parties | Ralph KEPPY, Walter Dengler, Ralph Kay, Charles Keppy, Henry Stoltenberg, Arnold Keppy, Leroy Marten, Albert Keppy, Henry Keppy, III, Appellants, v. Henry C. EHLERS, Chairman, Scott County Board of Supervisors, and Philip T. Heden, Warren G. Maxwell, Hilding E. Lund, Vernon L. Helble, members of the Scott County Board of Supervisors; Elmer Clayton, Administrative Officer, Scott County Zoning Ordinance, Appellees, Knickrehm Corporation, Intervenor-Appellee. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Eckerman, McFerren & Fair, Davenport, for appellants.
Norman M. Peterson, Davenport, for defendant-appellees.
Lambach, Shorey & Plath, Davenport, for intervenor-appellee.
As authorized by Chapter 358A, Code of Iowa, I.C.A., and amendments thereto, Scott County enacted a zoning ordinance in 1947. Pursuant thereto the unincorporated areas were divided into nine districts, classified as residence, rural, limited business, business, light industry, and heavy industry with detailed regulations for each district. Under the comprehensive plan then adopted, all rural territory, at least in Sheridan Township, with a few exceptions, was classified as E Rural, thus restricting its ues to agricultural uses. It was sort of a hold the line policy with future changes to be made as applications for such changes were made and the result was a piecemeal method of altering the existing classifications.
The specific issue here involves the reclassification of a twenty acre tract in Sheridan Township from E Rural to H Light Industry. It is located approximately at the interchange of Interstate No. 80 and Iowa Highway No. 150. It came about by application being made for such change by Knickrehn Corporation, Intervenor, which held this tract together with adjoining 150 acres under an option to purchase. A prior application to reclassify the entire 170 acres was rejected.
The record shows that the land in the vicinity of this interchange, including the twenty acres, is considered to be top agricultural land, with approximately the same topography and value per acre. It is likewise equally adaptable to light industry.
Chapter 358A, County Zoning, is basically patterned after Chapter 414, entitled Municipal Zoning. It provides that such zoning shall be done in accordance with a comprehensive plan and designed to lessen congestion in the street or highway; to secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; to protect health and the general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. The statute also provides that to secure such conditions, the county, or any area or areas within the county, may be divided into districts and within such districts it may regulate and restrict the erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, or use of buildings, structures or land. All such regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings throughout the district but may differ between districts. Such regulations shall be made with reasonable consideration as to the character of the area of the district and the peculiar suitability of such area for particular uses.
The record is clear that with the establishment of Interstate No. 80, situations, not originally foreseen, have arisen and the location of the interchange between No. 80 and Iowa Highway No. 150, has made land in this vicinity adaptable to a different classification, as well as E Rural. Does the reclassification of this twenty acres,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Perkins v. Bd. of Supervisors
...restrictions imposed upon the remaining portions of the same zoning district." Fox, 569 N.W.2d at 509 (quoting Keppy v. Ehlers, 253 Iowa 1021, 1023, 115 N.W.2d 198, 200 (1962)). We determine if spot zoning is valid under a three prong test in which we consider: (1) whether the new zoning is......
-
Montgomery v. Bremer County Bd. of Sup'rs
...and the similarity of other land in the same area, then it has zoned in accordance with a comprehensive plan. Keppy v. Ehlers, 253 Iowa 1021, 1023, 115 N.W.2d 198, 200 (1962); Vestal, Iowa Land Use and Zoning Law, § 3.01(d) The neighbors say that the rezoning of this land was solely the res......
-
DeSena v. Gulde
...(cf. Fritts v. City of Ashland, 348 S.W.2D 712 [Ky.]; Pearce v. Village of Edina, 263 Minn. 553, 118 N.W.2d 659; Keppy v. Ehlers, 253 Iowa 1021, 115 N.W.2d 198; anno., 51 A.L.R.2d 263, The judgment should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to the plaintiff. Judgment affirmed, wit......
-
Jaffe v. City of Davenport, 54063
...Anderson v. City of Cedar Rapids (Iowa, 1969), 168 N.W.2d 739; DePue v. City of Clinton (Iowa, 1968), 160 N.W.2d 860; Keppy v. Ehlers (1962), 253 Iowa 1021, 115 N.W.2d 198; Plaza Recreational Center v. City of Sioux City (1961), 253 Iowa 246, 111 N.W.2d 758; Hermann v. City of Des Moines, (......