Freeman v. Board of Adjustment
34 P.2d 534, 97 Mont. 342, 1934 Mont. LEXIS 89 (1934)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A zoning ordinance that delegates authority to a board of adjustment to grant variances in specific cases of unnecessary hardship is a constitutional exercise of police power and does not constitute an unlawful delegation of legislative authority.
Facts:
- In 1930, the city of Great Falls enacted a zoning ordinance.
- The ordinance classified the property at 800 Seventh Avenue North as a “C” residence district, where retail grocery stores were not a permitted use.
- L. B. Clark operated a retail grocery business at 812 Seventh Avenue North, which was a pre-existing, non-conforming use allowed by the ordinance.
- Clark purchased the property at 800 Seventh Avenue North, located in the same block, with the intent to build a new structure for his grocery business and a residence.
- Clark sought permission to construct his combined retail grocery and residence at the new location, which was not a permitted use under the ordinance.
Procedural Posture:
- L. B. Clark first applied directly to the Board of Adjustment and was granted a permit.
- An unnamed appellant (Clark's landlord at his previous location) petitioned the district court of Cascade county for a writ of review.
- The district court annulled the board's order because Clark had not first applied to the building inspector as required.
- Clark then applied for a permit from the city building inspector, who denied the application based on the zoning ordinance.
- Clark appealed the inspector's denial to the Board of Adjustment.
- After a hearing where the appellant protested, the Board of Adjustment granted the permit, finding it would prevent unnecessary hardship.
- The appellant again sought a writ of review from the district court of Cascade county.
- The district court reviewed the proceedings and affirmed the Board of Adjustment's order.
- The appellant now appeals the district court's judgment to the Supreme Court of Montana.
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 a municipal board of adjustment, created by a zoning ordinance, have the authority to grant a variance from the ordinance's terms to prevent unnecessary hardship, without such authority constituting an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power?
Opinions:
Majority - Stewart, J.
Yes. A municipal board of adjustment has the authority to grant a variance from a zoning ordinance's terms to prevent unnecessary hardship, and this is a constitutional delegation of power. The court reasoned that zoning ordinances are a valid exercise of the state's police power. Because a legislative body cannot possibly foresee and craft rules for every individual case of hardship, it is necessary and proper to delegate fact-finding and discretionary authority to an administrative agency like a board of adjustment. This delegation is not an unlawful grant of legislative power because the board operates within standards set by the ordinance, such as preventing 'unnecessary hardship' and ensuring actions are not 'contrary to the public interest.' The court further held that the existence of such a board is essential to the constitutionality of a zoning scheme, as it provides a necessary 'safety valve' to prevent the rigid application of general rules from causing undue harm or infringing on constitutional property rights.
Analysis:
This decision affirms the critical role of administrative boards of adjustment in the framework of modern zoning law. It establishes that granting these boards broad discretionary power to issue variances is not an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority but rather a necessary component to ensure the overall constitutionality and fairness of the zoning system. By framing the board as a fact-finding body applying established standards, the court provides a legal justification for the flexibility required to make zoning ordinances workable in practice. This precedent solidifies the power of such boards and insulates zoning schemes from attacks that they are overly rigid and confiscatory.
