Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin August 25, 2015 1 Volume 9 1 Issue 16 <br />519.021. In other words, the Commission and Trustee review process of <br />Willow's permitted use zoning certificate application was unlawful <br />because the procedures for creation of a planned residential develop- <br />ment did not apply to Willow's permitted use of the property. <br />Finding the unlawful portions of the Township's Zoning Ordinance <br />were severable from the remaining substantive provisions, the court <br />struck the unlawful sections (i.e., those requiring development plan <br />review of all uses by the Zoning Commission and the provision requir- <br />ing application for zoning certificates for permitted uses be transmitted <br />to the Zoning Commission) in their entirety. <br />Rezoning/Spot Zoning—County <br />rezones property from agricultural <br />to industrial use <br />Adjacent landowner argues rezoning <br />constitutes impermissible spot zoning <br />Citation: Dockter v. Burleigh County Bd. of County Com 'rs, 2015 ND <br />183, 2015 WL 4041146 (N.D. 2015) <br />NORTH DAKOTA (07/02/151)—This case addressed the issue of <br />whether a county commissioners' decision to rezone a 311 -acre tract of <br />land at the request of the landowner from agricultural to industrial use <br />constituted impermissible spot zoning. <br />The Background/Facts: In March 2013, Dale Pahlke ("Pahlke") ap- <br />plied to the Bismarck -Burleigh County Planning and Development <br />Department (the "Department") to rezone 311 acres of land (the "Prop- <br />erty") that he owned in Menoken Township (the "Township") in <br />Burleigh County (the "County"). Pahlke sought a rezone of his property <br />from agricultural use to light industrial use. Pahlke's Property was lo- <br />cated on the north side of an interstate but was otherwise surrounded by <br />property zoned for agricultural use. <br />Thane and Nicole Dockter (the "Dockters") owned land directly north <br />of Pahlke's Property. The Dockters operated a certified organic fatiii on <br />their land. The Dockters opposed Pahlke's application, claiming that the <br />industrial use of the adjacent land could contaminate their fields and <br />result in loss of certification of their organic farm. <br />Eventually, the County Planning Commission (the "Planning Com- <br />mission") recommended approval of Pahlke's application for the zoning <br />change, subject to specified conditions. In September, 2013, the County <br />Board of Commissioners (the "County Commissioners") adopted the <br />Planning Commission's recommendation to rezone Pahlke's Property <br />for industrial use, subject to specified conditions. <br />© 2015 Thomson Reuters 5 <br />