358 P.3d 67
Idaho2015Background
- AEHI proposed a nuclear power plant on ~5,000 acres in Payette County and applied to conditionally rezone about 500 acres from Agricultural to Heavy Industrial (I-2) tied to a development agreement.
- Payette County amended its comprehensive plan to designate the subject property Industrial and added a brief provision stating energy producers must apply and will be considered on an individual basis.
- AEHI filed a rezone + draft development agreement; drafts and revisions were posted publicly (some revisions posted 8–11 days before hearings; color-coded revisions posted 11 days before the Commissioner hearing).
- Planning & Zoning Commission recommended approval; the Board of County Commissioners approved the conditional rezone and development agreement.
- Multiple parties (including H-Hook) sought judicial review in district court; the district court upheld the County. H-Hook appealed to the Idaho Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to review validity of the comprehensive plan | H-Hook: district court has jurisdiction because challenge is tied to conditional rezone review under LLUPA | County/AEHI: judicial review of comprehensive plan amendment itself lacks statutory grant, so court lacks jurisdiction | Court: Jurisdiction exists because the plan challenge is collateral to the conditional rezone review authorized by I.C. §67-6521 |
| Whether comprehensive plan invalid for lacking required analysis under I.C. §67-6508(h) (power plant sites & transmission corridors) | H-Hook: plan lacks required "analysis" for power plant siting and transmission corridors and is therefore invalid | County/AEHI: statute requires only a "general plan"; the amendment and existing language satisfy §67-6508(h) | Court: Plan satisfies the statutory "general plans" requirement for power plant siting; transmission-corridor duty not triggered here, so plan is not invalid |
| Whether the rezone constituted illegal spot zoning | H-Hook: rezoning of the parcel for a nuclear plant is impermissible type-one and type-two spot zoning (singles out land for special use) | County/AEHI: rezone follows the amended comprehensive plan and is compatible with surrounding uses; not improper spot zoning | Court: Not spot zoning—rezone conforms to the amended comprehensive plan (no invalid type-one); factual findings support no impermissible type-two spot zoning |
| Whether notice/hearing procedures violated procedural due process (insufficient time to review development agreement revisions) | H-Hook: critical development agreement revisions were provided too late, depriving H-Hook meaningful opportunity to be heard | County/AEHI: draft and revised agreements were made publicly available (initial draft at filing; revisions posted 8–11 days before hearings); county ordinances did not require a development agreement at application filing | Held: No due process violation; timing (8–11 days) and prior access were adequate, and parties had opportunity to present testimony |
Key Cases Cited
- Sprenger, Grubb & Assocs., Inc. v. City of Hailey, 133 Idaho 320, 986 P.2d 343 (Idaho 1999) (a comprehensive plan must contain components specified in §67-6508 or state reasons why a component is unneeded)
- In re Jerome Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs, 153 Idaho 298, 281 P.3d 1076 (Idaho 2012) (standards and deference for judicial review of county land use decisions under LLUPA)
- Neighbors for a Healthy Gold Fork v. Valley Cnty., 145 Idaho 121, 176 P.3d 126 (Idaho 2007) (procedural due process in land-use hearings: modified plans provided 12 days before hearing did not violate due process)
- Evans v. Teton Cnty., 139 Idaho 71, 73 P.3d 84 (Idaho 2003) (spot zoning explained: type-one and type-two distinctions and test of conformity with comprehensive plan)
- Johnson v. City of Homedale, 118 Idaho 285, 796 P.2d 162 (Ct. App. 1990) (notice invalid where required application components were missing)
- Fischer v. City of Ketchum, 141 Idaho 349, 109 P.3d 1091 (Idaho 2005) (conditional permit invalid where application omitted statutorily/ordinance-required component)