State ex rel. Holiday Park, Inc. v. City of Columbia, 56204
| Decision Date | 10 April 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 56204,56204,2 |
| Citation | 479 S.W.2d 422 |
| Parties | STATE of Missouri ex rel. HOLIDAY PARK, INC., a Corporation, et al., Respondents, v. CITY OF COLUMBIA, Missouri, a Municipal Corporation, Richard Knipp, et al., Appellants, Newman & Holz, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Ronald E. Smull, William Brandecker, Columbia, for respondent, Holiday Park, Inc.
James H. Coonce, City Counselor, Co-lumbia, for appellants.
David B. Rogers, Smith, Lewis & Rogers, Columbia, for intervenor-appellant, Newman & Holz, Inc. DONNELLY, Judge.
This case involves an attempt by the City of Columbia at 'interim zoning' (see Comment, 18 Syracuse Law Review 837; and Annotation, 30 A.L.R.3d 1196), by inclusion in its zoning ordinance of the following provisions:
'(D) All territory which may hereafter be annexed to the City of Columbia shall automatically be placed in Zoning District A--1, for a period of not more than six (6) months, with the following exceptions:
(1) Real estate either used for, or shown on a recorded plat as to be used for, any use other than that allowed in the A--1 District, shall automatically be classified in the most restricted district allowing the existing or intended use.
(2) Real estate having deed restrictions as to the use of the property shall automatically be classified in the most restricted district allowing the use indicated by the deed restrictions.
(E) During the six (6) month period, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall proceed to recommend permanent zoning to the Council in the manner prescribed by law, within three (3) months, and the Council shall act on the recommendations in the normal manner in the remaining three months, causing permanent zoning districts to be created and having the official map changed to incorporate the permanent district lines.'
In May, 1969, four men decided to purchase a 40-acre tract of land, located outside the corporate limits of Columbia, for development of a trailer park. One of the men took title to the tract of land on September 24, 1969. On September 29, 1969, articles of incorporation were issued to Holiday Park, Inc. On October 7, 1969, an election to extend the corporate limits of Columbia was held, and a proposal to annex the tract, and other land, was approved by the electorate. On October 11, 1969, the tract was conveyed to Holiday Park, Inc.
Holiday Park, Inc. then requested approval of its plan for a trailer park. The City Council refused to adopt an ordinance which would have approved the plan. The Director of Public Works refused to issue a building permit.
Holiday Park, Inc. filed suit in the Circuit Court of Boone County, and, after hearing the case on its merits, the trial court entered its peremptory writs in mandamus ordering the City Council to adopt an ordinance approving the plan for the trailer park and ordering the Director of Public Works to issue a building permit. This appeal followed.
In State ex rel. Kramer v. Schwartz, 336 Mo. 932, 939--942, 82 S.W.2d 63, 66--68 (1935), this Court said:
'We think it clear upon elementary principles that the Enabling Act of 1925 (V.A.M.S. §§ 89.010--89.140), properly interpreted, must be treated as the measure of the power of Jefferson City to pass a valid zoning ordinance. The Enabling Act is a grant of a portion of the state's police power, and the extent of the powers granted as well as the manner of their exercise must conform to the terms of the grant.
'We are of the opinion that the provision of the Enabling Act of 1925 requiring that the municipal legislative body 'shall not hold its public hearings or take action until it has received the final report of the zoning or plan commission,' must be held to mean that the municipal legislative body cannot pass a valid zoning ordinance, such as is authorized by the act, until it has received the final report of the zoning or plan commission and held a public hearing thereon, as prescribed by the act. Furthermore, we are constrained to hold that the provisions of the Enabling Act requiring the local legislative body to provide for the appointment of a 'Board of Adjustment' to consist of five members who shall be freeholders with authority to review the orders and decisions of administrative officials substantially in the manner and to the extent specified in the act, is a mandatory provision of the act. In our view, both of the provisions of the Enabling Act just mentioned are material and substantial requirements intended to safeguard the property owner, the public, and the municipality against injustice, error, and precipitate or ill-advised action by local legislative bodies or administrative officers, are mandatory in character, and that compliance with these requirements is essential to the validity of any zoning ordinance, whether denominated 'interim' or permanent, passed under the authority of the act.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. City of Crestwood v. Lohman
...1990); State ex rel. Public Defender Comm'n v. County Court of Greene County, 667 S.W.2d 409 (Mo. banc 1984); State ex rel. Holiday Park, Inc. v. City of Columbia, 479 S.W.2d 422 (Mo. banc 1972); State ex rel. Continental Oil Co. v. Waddill, 318 S.W.2d 281 (Mo.1958); and State ex rel. Trian......
-
State ex rel. Casey's General Stores, Inc. v. City of Louisiana
...statutes are not complied with, the ordinance passed is invalidly enacted and cannot be enforced. State ex rel. Holiday Park, Inc. v. City of Columbia, 479 S.W.2d 422, 423, 425 (Mo.1972); O'Dwyer v. Monett, 123 Mo.App. 184, 100 S.W. 670 The most obvious reason for the invalidity of the Loui......
-
Rucci v. City of Pacific, 02-2817.
...passing and without analysis, that property annexed by a city entered the city as unzoned property. State ex rel. Holiday Park, Inc. v. City of Columbia, 479 S.W.2d 422, 424-25 (Mo.1972). Although the Missouri Supreme Court said Holiday Park's property "came into the City of Columbia as unz......