Good Morning Everyone:

One of my municipalities is starting to get a little more involved in planning and zoning rules and is trying to start to be a little more focused on planning as it moves forward. It has recently received a request to  re-zone about 1/4 of a city block from residential to commercial. I don’t think that there is an overall objection to the being the use of the property as it is right on a major highway and if proper planning was done today, it would likely be commercial to start with. The concern has been centered around the potential of “spot zoning” in one area for one owner. Normally when discussed, we just hear the simple statement “spot zoning is bad” without any explanation. From the little bit of information I’ve been able to find, it can still be allowed if the decision wasn’t completely arbitrary. So, if the board was to consider the area it is in, other uses around the property, the impact on surrounding owners, the overall comprehensive plan, and other potential items it would seem like they might be able to approve it without the potential issue of it being overturned by a district court.

Before I drafted something to the effect to advise the board, I wanted to check here to see if anyone had other thoughts or things that should be considered. If my analysis is way off, I would certainly appreciate hearing that as well.

I appreciate any help you can provide.

Thanks,

Jared Harrison
Harrison & Mecklenburg, Inc.
202 N. 6th Street
P.O. Box 658
Kingfisher, OK 73750
(Phone) 405-375-6484
(Fax) 405-375-6413
Email: jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.commailto:jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.com
Website: www.hmlawoffice.comhttp://www.hmlawoffice.com/
HM

[cid:105D3D03-DF9A-4FCB-9A35-93D42789CEA2]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain information which is legally privileged and/or confidential, and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please destroy it and notify us immediately at (405) 375-6484.

Jared,
It sounds like you are on the right track.  Zoning is usually guided and build around a comprehensive plan that is a broader, longer term vision on how city leaders expect the city to grow.  It is a great help in making infrastructure improvements and those type of longer term decisions.  There is a good video narrated by Steve Murdock, former City Attorney of Edmond, available on the OAMA website that give a good overview of planning and zoning principles.  It can be found here:
https://okmunicipalattorneys.org/recognition  then you scroll down to "Zoning and land use regulation"

Hope this is helpful.

Jeff H Bryant
Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel
jbryant@omag.orgmailto:jbryant@omag.org

[OMAG Small Logo Smooth]
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma  73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401
Cell: 405-830-8672
www.omag.orghttp://www.omag.org/

From: Jared Harrison via Oama oama@lists.imla.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2025 11:24 AM
To: Oama List oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Zoning Question

Good Morning Everyone:

One of my municipalities is starting to get a little more involved in planning and zoning rules and is trying to start to be a little more focused on planning as it moves forward. It has recently received a request to  re-zone about 1/4 of a city block from residential to commercial. I don't think that there is an overall objection to the being the use of the property as it is right on a major highway and if proper planning was done today, it would likely be commercial to start with. The concern has been centered around the potential of "spot zoning" in one area for one owner. Normally when discussed, we just hear the simple statement "spot zoning is bad" without any explanation. From the little bit of information I've been able to find, it can still be allowed if the decision wasn't completely arbitrary. So, if the board was to consider the area it is in, other uses around the property, the impact on surrounding owners, the overall comprehensive plan, and other potential items it would seem like they might be able to approve it without the potential issue of it being overturned by a district court.

Before I drafted something to the effect to advise the board, I wanted to check here to see if anyone had other thoughts or things that should be considered. If my analysis is way off, I would certainly appreciate hearing that as well.

I appreciate any help you can provide.

Thanks,

Jared Harrison
Harrison & Mecklenburg, Inc.
202 N. 6th Street
P.O. Box 658
Kingfisher, OK 73750
(Phone) 405-375-6484
(Fax) 405-375-6413
Email: jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.commailto:jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.com
Website: www.hmlawoffice.comhttp://www.hmlawoffice.com/
HM

[cid:image002.png@01DC0148.40D2C460]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain information which is legally privileged and/or confidential, and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please destroy it and notify us immediately at (405) 375-6484.

Zoning regulations not grant a municipality involved an “absolute and unrestrained discretion” to give or withhold permission for otherwise lawful uses. Kelly v. City of Bethany, 1978 OK 163, ¶ 9, 588 P.2d 567, 570. Rather than elevating the government into an effective co-owner of the land involved, municipal land use regulations are only about ensuring “a right thing [is not] in the wrong place,” such as controlling against “a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard.” Vill. of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 388 (1926)

A municipality’s zoning decisions are entitled to
qualified deference from the courts. Heisler v. Thomas, 1982 OK 105, 651 P.2d 1330. While the municipality’s zoning decisions are “presumptively valid,” they will be overruled if they constitute an “arbitrary exercise of [zoning] power.” Mid-Continent Life Ins. Co. v. City of Oklahoma City, 1985 OK 41, ¶ 9, 701 P.2d 412, 413. By way of illustration and not as a limitation, a decision is arbitrary (1) if the facts found by the municipality
in making its zoning decision do not have a logical connection to the decision made; (2) if the municipality relied on factors it was not permitted to consider when rendering its zoning decision, or (3) if the municipality’s zoning decision is so implausible that it cannot be explained by a mere difference in viewpoint.

All zoning decisions must be “made in accordance with a comprehensive plan” adopted by the
municipality. 11 OS § 43-103. “It is well settled” that a municipality’s zoning decisions will be upheld if the zoning decision’s compliance with the comprehensive plan is a “fairly debatable” one. Clary v. Oklahoma City, 1975 OK 35, ¶ 4, 532 P.2d 1383, 1384. A zoning decision is fairly debatable “if reasonable men could differ as to whether it was reasonable.” Heisler, 1982 OK 105, ¶ 5, 651 P.2d at 1331. If there is “conflicting evidence” as to the proper decision, the decision of
the municipality will control over the objections of the landowner. Garrett v. City of Oklahoma City, 1979 OK 60, ¶ 10, 594 P.2d 764, 766–67. This necessarily requires the municipality to have “a reasonable basis” for the decision made as revealed “in the record.” Oklahoma City v. Barclay, 1960 OK 254, ¶ 20, 359 P.2d 237, 242. As such, there must be “evidence” supporting the decision of the municipality. McNair v. City of Oklahoma City, 1971 OK 134, ¶ 15, 490 P.2d 1364, 1367. Under this rubric, so long as it is supported by relevant evidence, a reviewing court will not
question the “expedience or wisdom” of the decision made. Kelly, 1978 OK 163, ¶ 14, 588 P.2d at 567. Stated another way, the municipality’s zoning decision need not be the best decision as long as it is a plausible one.

Not all evidence is proper for the municipality to consider when making zoning decisions, however. For example, “opinions…as to the desirability of a particular [zoning decision]” will not, standing alone, warrant a conclusion that the decision was a fairly debatable one. City of Tulsa v. Swanson, 1961 OK 286, ¶ 10, 366 P.2d 629, 633. “Because the inevitable effect of zoning [decisions] is to limit private rights,” this power “must be carefully guarded.” Nucholls v. Bd. of
Adjustment of City of Tulsa, 1977 OK 3, ¶ 11, 560 P.2d 556, 560. Rather than being allowed to review any materials and opinions whatsoever, the evidence reviewed by the municipality must “disclose the need” for zoning regulation in view of the “circumstances and conditions” in the given case. Id. Each zoning decision must “stand or fall on the pertinent basic physical facts involved.” City of Tulsa v. Mobley, 1969 OK 85, ¶ 8, 454 P.2d 901, 903. Basic physical facts include, among other things, (1) the character of the property, (2) the nature of the surrounding properties, (3) the actual and proposed use of the property and surrounding properties, and (4) the recent trends in the development of the area. Barclay, 1960 OK 254, ¶ 20, 359 P.2d at 242. Other basic physical facts include (1) the effect on congression in public streets, (2) the property’s susceptibility to fire and other dangers, (3) the effect the proposed use will have on the quality of life on the surrounding properties, (4) whether the property will have adequate access to the natural environment, (5) the effect on overcrowding on the property itself, (6) the need to preserve historically significant sites, (7) the desire to avoid undue concentration of the municipal population, and (8) the ability of the property to be served by adequate transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, and other similar public infrastructure systems. 11 OS §
43-103. Zoning decisions which lack a “reasonable factual foundation” tethered to such basic physical facts are necessarily “unreasonable and therefore void.” Lakewood Dev. Co. v. Oklahoma City, 1975 OK CIV APP 15, ¶ 12, 534 P.2d 23, 26

JTH

John Tyler Hammons
Hammons Hamby & Price, PLLC
(918) 683-0309

Sent from my iPhone

From: Jeff Bryant via Oama oama@lists.imla.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2025 11:56 AM
To: Jared Harrison jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.com; Oama List oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: Zoning Question

Jared,
It sounds like you are on the right track.  Zoning is usually guided and build around a comprehensive plan that is a broader, longer term vision on how city leaders expect the city to grow.  It is a great help in making infrastructure improvements and those type of longer term decisions.  There is a good video narrated by Steve Murdock, former City Attorney of Edmond, available on the OAMA website that give a good overview of planning and zoning principles.  It can be found here:
https://okmunicipalattorneys.org/recognition  then you scroll down to “Zoning and land use regulation”

Hope this is helpful.

Jeff H Bryant
Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel
jbryant@omag.orgmailto:jbryant@omag.org

[OMAG Small Logo Smooth]
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma  73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401
Cell: 405-830-8672
www.omag.orghttp://www.omag.org/

From: Jared Harrison via Oama oama@lists.imla.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2025 11:24 AM
To: Oama List oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Zoning Question

Good Morning Everyone:

One of my municipalities is starting to get a little more involved in planning and zoning rules and is trying to start to be a little more focused on planning as it moves forward. It has recently received a request to  re-zone about 1/4 of a city block from residential to commercial. I don’t think that there is an overall objection to the being the use of the property as it is right on a major highway and if proper planning was done today, it would likely be commercial to start with. The concern has been centered around the potential of “spot zoning” in one area for one owner. Normally when discussed, we just hear the simple statement “spot zoning is bad” without any explanation. From the little bit of information I’ve been able to find, it can still be allowed if the decision wasn’t completely arbitrary. So, if the board was to consider the area it is in, other uses around the property, the impact on surrounding owners, the overall comprehensive plan, and other potential items it would seem like they might be able to approve it without the potential issue of it being overturned by a district court.

Before I drafted something to the effect to advise the board, I wanted to check here to see if anyone had other thoughts or things that should be considered. If my analysis is way off, I would certainly appreciate hearing that as well.

I appreciate any help you can provide.

Thanks,

Jared Harrison
Harrison & Mecklenburg, Inc.
202 N. 6th Street
P.O. Box 658
Kingfisher, OK 73750
(Phone) 405-375-6484
(Fax) 405-375-6413
Email: jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.commailto:jared.harrison@hmlawoffice.com
Website: www.hmlawoffice.comhttp://www.hmlawoffice.com/
HM

[cid:image002.png@01DC0148.40D2C460]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain information which is legally privileged and/or confidential, and is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please destroy it and notify us immediately at (405) 375-6484.