Case Title: Granger v. Town of Woodford

Citation: 167 Vt. 610, 708 A.2d 1345

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1998-03-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
Granger v. Town of Woodford  (97-200); 167 Vt. 610; 708 A.2d 1345

[Filed 10-Mar-1998]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 97-200

                             DECEMBER TERM, 1997

Dorothy and Raymond Granger     }     APPEALED FROM:
                                }
                                }
     v.                         }     Bennington Superior Court
                                }
Town of Woodford                }
                                }     DOCKET NO. S0078-96BcCa

       In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Plaintiff landowners Dorothy and Raymond Granger appeal a Bennington
  Superior Court order granting defendant Town of Woodford's motion for
  summary judgment.  Landowners contend that the court erred in concluding
  that town's decision to establish a commercial zone was a constitutional
  exercise of town's police powers.  We affirm.

       On March 1, 1994, a majority of town's electorate voted to change the
  zoning classification of a .82 acre parcel of land owned by David and
  Rosalie Wright from "Rural Residential" to "Roadside Commercial."  This
  parcel of land is used to operate an automobile repair shop out of a
  three-bay garage.  Until 1994, there were several parcels of land that
  contained pre-existing, nonconforming commercial uses within Woodford,
  including landowners' antique business and a motel.  There were, however,
  no parcels of land zoned for commercial use.

       Landowners filed a complaint for declaratory judgment with the
  Bennington Superior Court, alleging that the creation of the "Roadside
  Commercial" district was unconstitutional because it constituted unlawful
  spot zoning.  Landowners and town filed cross-motions for summary judgment. 
  The court, concluding that the rezoning was not unconstitutional, granted
  town's summary judgment motion.  This appeal followed.

       Spot zoning consists of zoning that "single[s] out a small parcel or
  perhaps even a single lot for a use classification different from the
  surrounding area and inconsistent with any comprehensive plan, for the
  benefit of the owner of such property."  Galanes v. Town of Brattleboro,
  136 Vt. 235, 239,