From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bird v. Sorenson

Supreme Court of Utah
Aug 13, 1964
16 Utah 2 (Utah 1964)

Summary

In Bird v. Sorenson, 16 Utah 2d 1, 394 P.2d 808 (1964), this Court held unanimously that a city ordinance rezoning properties from residential to commercial was not subject to referendum.

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Manning

Opinion

No. 10050.

August 13, 1964.

Appeal from the Second Judicial District Court, Weber County, Parley E. Norseth, J.

Froerer, Horowitz, Richards, Parker Thornley, Ogden, for appellant.

David S. Kunz, of Kunz Kunz, Olmstead, Stine Campbell, Ogden, for respondent.


The City of Washington Terrace has in effect a master zoning plan ordinance. Subsequent to its adoption, the City Council passed an ordinance changing the classification of certain property from residential to commercial use. Plaintiff, a taxpaying resident and elector, sought to have the latter ordinance submitted to a referendum vote. Defendant, City Recorder Olive Sorenson, refused to accept plaintiff's petition, and the latter sought a writ of mandamus. Intervenors are the holders of an option to purchase the property involved. The lower court dismissed her petition and plaintiff appeals.

The ordinance in question was passed after the requested change had been studied and recommended by the planning commission and after a public hearing had been held. The determinative question is whether or not the action of the City Council was administrative or legislative. If the former, it is not subject to referendum. We so hold, based upon logic and prior decisions of this court. If each change in a zoning classification were to be submitted to a vote of the city electors, any master plan would be rendered inoperative. Such changes are administrative acts implementing the comprehensive plan and adjusting it to current conditions.

10-9-20, U.C.A. 1953.

Keigley v. Bench, 97 Utah 69, 89 P.2d 480, 122 A.L.R. 756 (1939); Shriver v. Bench, 6 Utah 2d 329, 313 P.2d 475 (1957); see also: Kelley v. John, 162 Neb. 319, 75 N.W.2d 713 (1956) and 5 Utah L.Rev. 414 (1957).

Affirmed. Costs to defendants.

HENRIOD, C.J., and McDONOUGH, CROCKETT and WADE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bird v. Sorenson

Supreme Court of Utah
Aug 13, 1964
16 Utah 2 (Utah 1964)

In Bird v. Sorenson, 16 Utah 2d 1, 394 P.2d 808 (1964), this Court held unanimously that a city ordinance rezoning properties from residential to commercial was not subject to referendum.

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Manning

In Bird v. Sorenson, 16 Utah 2 d 1, 394 P.2d 808 (Sup. Ct. 1964), the court, as in Kelley, supra, stated that the enactment of an ordinance carrying out the planning commission's recommendation that classification of certain property be changed from residential to commercial use was an administrative act and therefore the adopted ordinance was not subject to referendum.

Summary of this case from Smith v. Township of Livingston
Case details for

Bird v. Sorenson

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHY M. BIRD, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, v. OLIVE SORENSON, CITY…

Court:Supreme Court of Utah

Date published: Aug 13, 1964

Citations

16 Utah 2 (Utah 1964)
394 P.2d 808

Citing Cases

Krejci v. City of Saratoga Springs & Lori Yates

¶ 30 In two prior decisions, we have denominated site-specific rezoning as administrative and therefore…

Citizen's Awareness Now v. Marakis

We attempt today to provide that clarification. In addition to Wilson, 657 P.2d at 253-54, this court has…