Creative Displays, Inc. v. City of Florence
1980 Ky. LEXIS 248, 602 S.W.2d 682 (1980)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The formation of a joint, multi-jurisdictional planning unit requires the actual preparation of a new, single comprehensive plan that addresses the goals of the entire new unit, not merely the pro forma adoption of pre-existing, separate plans. Statutory requirements for preparing a comprehensive plan, including holding a public hearing for the new unified plan, must be strictly complied with, as substantial compliance is insufficient.
Facts:
- The City of Florence adopted its own zoning ordinance in December 1962.
- Boone County adopted its own zoning ordinance in February 1966.
- A new state law, KRS Chapter 100, became effective on June 16, 1966, encouraging the formation of joint planning units.
- In September 1966, Florence, Walton, Hopeful Heights, and Boone County formed a new, county-wide joint planning unit known as the Boone County Planning and Zoning Commission.
- In October 1966, the new Commission adopted its 'comprehensive plan' by simply combining the pre-existing, separate plans of Florence and Boone County.
- The Commission did not hold a public hearing to consider the adoption of this new, county-wide comprehensive plan.
- Creative Displays, Inc. owned billboards that were regulated by ordinances enacted pursuant to the Commission's comprehensive plan.
Procedural Posture:
- Creative Displays, Inc. filed suit against Boone County and the City of Florence in Boone Circuit Court (trial court), challenging the validity of their zoning ordinances.
- The trial court found the ordinances were constitutional and properly enacted, and dismissed Creative Displays' complaint.
- Creative Displays, as appellant, appealed to the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the respondents (Boone County and Florence) were in 'substantial compliance' with the law.
- The Supreme Court of Kentucky granted discretionary review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the pro forma adoption of pre-existing, separate comprehensive plans from constituent jurisdictions, without preparing a new unified plan or holding a new public hearing, satisfy the statutory requirements of KRS Chapter 100 for a newly formed joint planning unit?
Opinions:
Majority - Stephens, Justice
No. The pro forma adoption of pre-existing plans without preparing a new one for the joint unit and holding a new public hearing does not satisfy the statutory requirements, rendering the plan and its subsequent ordinances void. The court reasoned that the statute's mandate to 'prepare' a comprehensive plan for 'the planning unit' means a new plan must be created for the new, larger entity, not simply adopted from its constituent parts. The legislative intent was to foster cohesive, county-wide planning, which requires fresh analysis and goals for the entire unit. Furthermore, the statute's public hearing requirement is critical; prior hearings for separate, local plans do not suffice because they denied citizens of the various jurisdictions the opportunity to comment on the integrated plan for the entire county-wide unit. The court rejected the lower court's 'substantial compliance' reasoning, holding that zoning statutes like KRS Chapter 100 must be strictly construed.
Analysis:
This decision establishes that municipalities forming a joint planning unit cannot take procedural or substantive shortcuts by merely recycling old plans. It solidifies the principle of strict construction for zoning statutes, signaling that courts will invalidate regulations not created in exact accordance with statutory mandates. The ruling emphasizes the importance of public participation in the zoning process, ensuring that all citizens of a newly-formed administrative unit have a voice in its integrated development. This precedent makes it significantly harder for local governments to avoid the work of creating a genuinely new and cohesive plan when they consolidate planning functions.
