American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Practice Exam

Under what condition have courts ruled that rezoning does NOT constitute spot zoning?

1. If the rezoning is adopted by unanimous vote of the legislative body

2. If the rezoning is not appealed

3. If the rezoning is enacted in accordance with a comprehensive plan

4. If the rezoning allows for special permit or special exception waivers

The correct answer is: If the rezoning is enacted in accordance with a comprehensive plan

The determination that rezoning does not constitute spot zoning typically hinges on whether the rezoning aligns with a broader and established comprehensive plan. Courts prioritize the comprehensive plan as a guiding framework for development and land use decisions. When a rezoning is enacted in accordance with this plan, it suggests that the change is part of a coherent strategy for land use that serves the public interest rather than being an isolated and arbitrary decision focused on a particular property. Adhering to a comprehensive plan indicates that the rezoning is consistent with the overall vision for the community, considering factors such as infrastructure capacity, economic development, environmental protection, and social equity. This alignment minimizes the likelihood that the rezoning will lead to consequences typical of spot zoning, which often involves giving special treatment to a small area that may not serve the broader objectives of the community. In contrast, other conditions, such as unanimous votes or lack of appeals, do not necessarily address the underlying principles that define spot zoning. They may not ensure that the change follows a well-founded, comprehensive approach to land use planning.