Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Legislative bodies may make such classifications as they deem necessary and as long as their classifications are based upon reasonable grounds so as not to be arbitrary or capricious they will not be upset by the courts.
The city adopted a supplemental zoning ordinance which expressly prohibited the construction within a certain area motels, motor courts, motor lodges, motor hotels, tourist camps, tourist courts, and structures of a similar character intended for a similar use. Respondents, property owners, filed an action seeking a judgment directing the issuance of a permit to them for construction of a motel and setting aside the supplemental ordinance. The trial court granted such motion. Appellants, building inspector, mayor, and council, sought review of the trial court’s decision.
Did the trial court err in setting aside the city’s supplemental zoning ordinance?
The court reversed the decision of the trial court, holding that the classification by the city had a reasonable basis and was entitled to stand. The court held that appellants, building inspector, mayor, and council, as policy makers for the city were entitled to make classifications as they deemed necessary and as long as their classifications were based upon reasonable grounds so as not to be arbitrary or capricious. The court held that the classification was reasonable as a protection of the community's general welfare where the area in which motels were restricted was a previously residential area.