This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq.
In this case, Appellants Darin Gilley and Karen Dean appealed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Franklin County affirming the decision of the County Commission of Franklin County granting the rezoning of 12.68 acres of land owned by Landvatter Enterprises, LLC from a Community Development Zoning District (“CD”) to a Commercial Activity 3 – Community Business – Zoning District (“CA3”). Landvatter sought to rezone it to CA3 for the purpose of operating a concrete batch plant to manufacture and sell concrete products.
On appeal, Appellants first argued the rezoning of Landvatter’s Property from CD to CA3 constituted impermissible spot zoning because the rezoning operated as a wealth transfer for one entity, did not promote the public good, and did not follow the goals of the Master Plan. As such, they contended the Commission’s decision to rezone Landvatter’s Property was out of alignment with the Master Plan. The record reflected, however, the concrete batch plant promotes the expansion of the manufacturing field within Franklin County. There was also testimony presented about the need for a concrete batch plant in the area because concrete was a perishable product. Additionally, the Commission followed the guidance of the Master Plan to ensure there was a buffer zone between the residential community and the concrete batch plant.
The court next found that Appellants failed to demonstrate Article 7, Section 138 is unconstitutional as applied under the Due Process Clauses of the U.S. and Missouri Constitution. Specifically, Appellants failed to cite any controlling authority that supported their argument that Franklin County could not in its legislative discretion list manufacturing as a permitted use in its CA3 Zoning District. Appellants also failed to cite to authority stating that manufacturing and industrial uses could not be contained in different zones. The court therefore found that appellants failed to show that the Commission abdicated its authority.
Lastly, Appellants contended the rezoning had no substantial relationship to the health, safety, morals, or general welfare, and the rezoning violates Franklin County Planning and Zoning Unified Land Use Regulations, the Master Plan, and section 64.850 RSMo 2016. Despite Appellants’ argument that their property values would decline, there was evidence presented showing residential homes near Landvatter’s Kirkwood plant, which were closer in proximity then Appellants’ homes, were still in the same range they had been. Moreover, there was testimony presented about how the Buffer would help alleviate the noise and dust from the concrete batch plant. While there were noise complaints from Landvatter’s other concrete batch plants presented to the Commission, there was evidence that indicated that Landvatter was never found to be in violation of St. Louis County regulations. As the rezoning decision was at least fairly debatable, the court noted that it could not substitute its opinion for that of the Commission, and affirmed the Commission’s decision to rezone the 12.68 acres of Landvatter’s Property from CD to CA3.
Gilley v County Commission of Franklin County, 611 S.W. 3d 569 (MO App. 12/22/2020)
Leave a Reply