Gorieb v. Fox

Background

A man who owned several lots in a Roanoke residential district wanted to build a brick store on one lot next to his home. The city had ordinances dividing areas into business and residential zones and a set-back rule that required new buildings to be placed back from the street based on where sixty percent of the existing houses in the block stood. The city council had reserved the power to allow exceptions. The council approved a permit that required the store to be set back more than seven feet from the petitioner’s preferred line, and the owner sued to force the council to let him build up to the street line. Local courts upheld the ordinance and the council’s action.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether the set-back rule violated the Constitution’s guarantee of fair process or equal protection, or unlawfully took property. It found the petitioner could not show the rule was vague or that the council abused its exception power in his case. The opinion explained that rules requiring yards, building heights, and set-backs serve familiar city concerns like light, air, noise, safety, and fire protection. The Court relied on prior decisions supporting broad city power to regulate land use and concluded this particular ordinance was not clearly arbitrary or unreasonable, so it was constitutional.

Real world impact

The decision lets cities enforce set-back requirements in residential areas and keep their spacing and neighborhood character. It also confirms that city councils may retain discretion to grant exceptions in special cases, and owners in residential districts face limits on building up to the street line.