Ridgewood Land Co. v. Moore
| Decision Date | 05 May 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 45343,45343 |
| Parties | RIDGEWOOD LAND COMPANY and Area Residents, Henry E. Lampe, et al. v. Leroy MOORE and W. P. Garth. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Waller, Pritchard & Fox, Barry H. Powell, Sullivan, Sullivan & Keyes, Jackson, for appellant.
Rice P. York, Jackson, for appellee.
Leroy Moore and W. P. Garth, appellees, filed with the City Council of the City of Jackson a petition to rezone from Residential A-1 to Commercial a small tract of land located just inside the northern city limits. Ridgewood Land Company and others objected. The property sought to be rezoned consists of approximately 1.5 acres at the northeast corner of a 4.5-acre tract, bounded on the east by Ridgewood Road, on the north by undeveloped property, and on the south and west by White Oak Creek, and the remainder of the 4.5 acres owned by appellees. After a hearing, the City Planning Board recommended to the City Council that the request for rezoning be denied.
A subsequent hearing before the City Council resulted in denial of the petition. Its order found that petitioners failed to meet the burden to show a public need for additional commercial zoning in the area. Approximately 210 feet north of the subject property is a commercially zoned tract of 20 acres owned by Ridgewood Land Company, which has not been developed except for a service station and a small store. The Council further found that petitioners failed to show errors in the original zoning or any material changes in the residential character of the neighborhood since the original zoning; that rezoning for commercial use would aggravate a traffic condition at the intersection of Ridgewood Road and Adkins Boulevard; that the 20-acre commercial tract is of sufficient size to take care of present commercial needs; and that commercial development of the subject land would render the surrounding, highly developed residential property less desirable for residential purposes and would greatly depreciate its value.
At the Council hearing, three qualified expert witnesses testified that appellee's land can be developed profitably for residential purposes. There was also evidence to support Council findings that there is no need for rezoning of any additional property as commercial, rezoning this tract to commercial would cause a substantial depreciation in the value of the surrounding residential area, and authorizing commercial development on the 1.5-acre tract would aggravate a traffic condition at the intersection. In short, there was substantial evidence to support the findings of the City Council.
However, the circuit court reversed the order of the Council and ordered that the property be rezoned for commercial use. It thought that one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thrash v. Mayor and Com'rs of City of Jackson
...v. Aldridge, 487 So.2d 1345, 1347 (Miss.1986); Taquino v. City of Ocean Springs, 253 So.2d 854, 855 (Miss.1971); Ridgewood Land Company v. Moore, 222 So.2d 378, 379 (Miss.1969); Ballard v. Smith, 234 Miss. 531, 107 So.2d 580, 586 (1958); W.H. Holcomb, Inc. v. City of Clarksdale, 217 Miss. 8......
-
Short v. Williams
...(¶9) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) (citing McWaters v. City of Biloxi , 591 So. 2d 824, 827 (Miss. 1991) ) (quoting Ridgewood Land Co. v. Moore , 222 So. 2d 378, 379 (Miss. 1969) ). Any challenge that is "fairly debatable" will not be sufficient to invalidate a Board's zoning decision. "In attempti......
-
Cockrell v. Panola County Bd. of Sup'Rs
...v. City of Gulfport, 293 So.2d 21 (Miss.1974); Currie v. Ryan and City of Hattiesburg, 243 So.2d 48 (Miss.1970); Ridgewood Land Co. v. Moore, 222 So.2d 378 (Miss. 1969); Paine v. Underwood, 203 So.2d 593 (Miss.1967)). Before the zoning authority rezones the property, though, it must have pr......
-
City of New Albany v. Ray, s. 53287
...v. City of Gulfport, 293 So.2d 21 (Miss.1974); Currie v. Ryan and City of Hattiesburg, 243 So.2d 48 (Miss.1970); Ridgewood Land Co. v. Moore, 222 So.2d 378 (Miss.1969); Paine v. Underwood, 203 So.2d 593 On the record before this Court, we are of the opinion that the action of the City in de......