Wally v. City of Kannapolis
365 N.C. 449
| N.C. | 2012Background
- 75.9 acres owned by Coddle Creek, LLC and Wallace Charitable Trust rezoned from rural to Campus Development-Conditional Zoning through annexation in 2007.
- Zoning amendment approved by Kannapolis Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council following a staff report analyzing consistency and impacts.
- Plaintiffs alleged the City failed to adopt a statutorily required statement under N.C.G.S. § 160A-383 and claimed illegal spot zoning.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for defendant; plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals.
- Court of Appeals presumed validity of the amendment, held no judicial review of the statement sufficiency, and addressed spot zoning under Blades v. Raleigh.
- Supreme Court reversed, holding no approved 160A-383 statement and voiding the amendment; remanded for proceedings not inconsistent with opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Kannapolis approve a § 160A-383 statement? | Wally argues no approved statement. | Kannapolis contends staff report implied approval of the statement. | No approved statement; amendment invalid |
| Can implied approval of the staff report satisfy § 160A-383? | Implied approval by having staff report in hand when adopting the amendment. | Implied approval should be recognized in this context. | Implied approval not recognized; insufficient to satisfy § 160A-383 |
| Does a general declaration that action complied with guidelines satisfy § 160A-383? | Statement adopted by Council claimed compliance with guidelines. | That declaration suffices under the statute. | No; statement must describe consistency with plan and explain reasonableness and public interest |
Key Cases Cited
- Blades v. City of Raleigh, 280 N.C. 531, 187 S.E.2d 35 (1972) (zoning power limits and requirement for following enabling acts)
- Raleigh v. Morand, 247 N.C. 363, 100 S.E.2d 870 (1957) (burden on challengers to overcome presumption of validity)
- Robins v. Town of Hillsborough, 361 N.C. 193, 639 S.E.2d 421 (2007) (summary judgment review standard)
- Zopfi v. City of Wilmington, 273 N.C. 430, 160 S.E.2d 325 (1968) (zoning power and public welfare standards)
- Schloss v. Jamison, 262 N.C. 108, 136 S.E.2d 691 (1964) (limitations of the enabling act and comprehensive plans)
- Allgood v. Town of Tarboro, 281 N.C. 430, 189 S.E.2d 255 (1972) (zoning authority derived from police power; comprehensive plan alignment)