Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin April 10, 2013 I Volume 7 I Issue 7 <br />See also: Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 92 S. Ct. 1526, 32 L. Ed. <br />2d 15 (1972). <br />See also: F.C.C. v. Beach Communications, Inc., 508 U.S. 307, 113 S. <br />Ct. 2096, 124 L. Ed. 2d 211, 21 Medici L. Rep. (BNA) 1466 (1993). <br />Landowner contends ordinance is preempted <br />by the National Manufactured Housing <br />Construction and Safety Standards Act <br />Citation: Schanzenbach v. Town of Opal, Wyo., 706 F.3d 1269 (loth <br />Cir. 2013) <br />The Tenth Circuit has jurisdiction over Colorado, Kansas, New <br />Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. <br />TENTH CIRCUIT (WYOMING) (02/7/13)—This case addressed the <br />issue of whether a local zoning ordinance that prohibited the. installation <br />of any manufactured home that was older than 10 years at the time of the <br />permit application was preempted by the National Manufactured Housing <br />Construction and Safety Standards Act. It also addressed whether the <br />ordinance violated a landowner's equal protection and substantive due <br />process rights under the United States Constitution. <br />The Background/Facts: Roger Schanzenbach ("Schanzenbach") <br />owned several properties in the town of Opal, Wyoming ("Opal"). He <br />soughtto install mobile manufactured homes on those properties, and ap- <br />plied for the required permits with Opal. Opal's town council issued sev- <br />eral building permits to Schanzenbach. However, shortly thereafter, the <br />town council enacted an ordinance that included a provision banning the <br />installation of any manufactured home that was older than 10 years at the <br />time of the relevant permit application (the "10-Year Rule"). <br />When Schanzenbach's permits were about to lapse, he had not yet <br />started construction on his properties. He requested an extension, and the <br />town council denied his request. It also rejected his applications for new <br />permits because the proposed homes were more than 10 years old and <br />thus violated the 10-Year Rule. <br />Schanzenbach brought a legal action against Opal and its town council <br />(hereinafter, collectively "Opal"). He argued that Opal's 10-Year Rule <br />was preempted by the National Manufactured Housing Construction and <br />© 2013 Thomson Reuters 9 <br />