Adams v. Mayor and Board of Aldermen of The City of Natchez


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2006-CC-00699-COA
Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 09-11-2007
Opinion Author: KING, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed
Additional Case Information: Topic: Real property - Rezoning - Change in neighborhood - Public need - Minimum lot areas - Spot zoning
Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): IRVING, J.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY
Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 03-28-2006
Appealed from: Adams County Circuit Court
Judge: Forrest Johnson
Disposition: AFFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF ALDERMAN TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY
Case Number: 05-KV-0243-J
  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: LEMUEL ADAMS, MARCIA ADAMS, JOHN BALLARD, MELINDA BALLARD, ROBERT BARNETTE, PHILLIP CARBY, STELLA CARBY, CINDY COCHRAN, RICKY COCHRAN, CINDY SIMONTON COOKE, RANDA JEX, ALBERT METCALFE, GAY METCALFE, MARY MIMI MILLER, RONALD MILLER, MARGARET MOSS, CAROLYNE PRIESTER, ROBERT STEPHENS, JACQUELINE STEPHENS AND NEIL VARNELL




BRUCE M. KUEHNLE PHILIP ELMER CARBY



  
Appellee: MAYOR AND BOARD OF ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF NATCHEZ, MISSISSIPPI AND JAMES D. GAMMILL, II EVERETT T. SANDERS ROBERT C. LATHAM JEREMY PETER DIAMOND  
Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.
Topic: Real property - Rezoning - Change in neighborhood - Public need - Minimum lot areas - Spot zoning
Summary of the Facts: Fat Mama’s Tamales is a restaurant on Canal Street in Natchez. The United States Department of the Interior appropriated parcels of land, including the land that houses Fat Mama’s Tamales, for use as a national park. After searching for a suitable place to relocate the business, the owners of Fat Mama’s, including James Gammill, found an available parcel of land on Canal Street at the corner of Washington Street, approximately one-hundred yards from Fat Mama’s original location. The lot, which measures one hundred feet by three hundred twenty feet, was zoned O-L (Open Land) and was used as a paved parking lot. Re-zoning the lot to B-2 (General Business) was required in order for Fat Mama’s to build and operate the restaurant on this new parcel. Gammill applied for re-zoning of the lot from O-L to B-2 with the Natchez Metropolitan Planning Commission. The Commission, on its own motion, voted unanimously to re-zone the property from O-L (Open Land) to B-1 (Neighborhood Business). A number of residents appealed the Commission’s decision to the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen, and Gammill also appealed the denial of his application. The Mayor and Board voted unanimously to grant Gammill’s application to re-zone the parcel from O-L to B-2. The Mayor and Board then voted unanimously to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision to re-zone the parcel from O-L to B-1. The residents appealed the decision of the Mayor and Board to the circuit court. The circuit court affirmed the decision of the Mayor and Board. The residents appeal.
Summary of Opinion Analysis: The residents argue that Gammill failed to provide the board with clear and convincing evidence that the character of the neighborhood has changed to such an extent as to justify reclassification, and there was a public need for rezoning. However, the record is clear that Gammill did demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, evidence of a change in the neighborhood and a public need that supported a re-zoning of the parcel from O-L to B-2. The Mayor and Board heard the presentation of Gammill, in which he stated that the federal government had taken the current site of Fat Mama’s Tamales for purposes of establishing a national park. Gammill also stated that he had searched for alternative locations in the area, but could not find any in the historic area in which the restaurant was currently located. Gammill also stated that the proposed site was across the street and approximately one hundred yards from the restaurant’s current location. Gammill also discussed his restaurant’s reputation as a tourist attraction and his desire to invest $350,000 to $450,000 into the new building so that he could continue the business. Fat Mama’s Tamales currently employs six to eight people and contributes approximately $30,000 per year to Natchez’s tax revenues. Additionally, the city planner discussed the nature of the area. He stated that with the development of the area, traffic had increased along Canal Street, that areas of Canal Street had been re-zoned to B-2, and that the area was moving toward an area of increased business as the downtown/waterfront areas expanded. The city planner referenced the recent acquisition of land for the national park as an indication that Canal Street is a public use, rather than a residential area. Thus, the evidence presented supports a finding of a public need to re-zone this particular parcel. The residents argue that the decision of the Mayor and Board violates the zoning ordinances requiring minimum lot areas for the creation of a new district. The zoning ordinances in question mean that a proposed amendment re-zoning a parcel to B-2 is permissible, so long as it meets the other requirements listed in the ordinance (error or change in neighborhood or increased need or subdivision of land), regardless of the size of the parcel to be re-zoned. Additionally, the ordinance’s description of the nature and uses of a B-2 district state that “[t]here is no minimum required lot area.” Accordingly, those size restrictions are not applicable in this case. The residents argue that the rezoning constituted spot zoning. Given the mixed-use nature of the area and the fact that most of Canal Street is zoned for B-2 use, the Mayor and Board’s decision does not constitute spot zoning. The residents argue that the Mayor and Board were required to make specific findings of fact. However, the Mayor and Board did, in fact, adopt findings of fact in the motion to re-zone the property.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court