917 Lusk, LLC v. City of Boise

158 Idaho 12, 343 P.3d 41 (2015)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

917 Lusk, LLC v. City of Boise

Idaho Supreme Court
158 Idaho 12, 343 P.3d 41 (2015)

Facts

Royal Boulevard Associates, LP (Royal) (defendant) applied for a conditional-use permit to build an apartment complex in Boise, Idaho. The proposed location of the complex was zoned to allow multi-family housing; however, the zoning ordinance required a conditional-use permit for the construction of buildings more than 35 feet tall. The apartment complex was projected to be between 59 and 63 feet tall. 917 Lusk, LLC (Lusk) (plaintiff), the owner of an adjacent building, opposed Royal’s application, arguing that Royal’s plan for the apartment complex included inadequate parking, which would contribute to traffic issues and negatively impact surrounding property owners. The Boise City Code (the city code) required the Zoning and Planning Commission (the commission) (defendant) to refrain from granting a conditional-use permit if the proposed use would adversely affect other property in the vicinity. The city code also allowed the commission to attach standards to a conditional-use permits that were more restrictive than those imposed by the city code. The commission mistakenly believed that it was bound by the standards set forth in the parking chapter of the city code and that it did not have the discretion to require additional parking as a condition of the conditional-use permit. Thus, it granted the permit without considering the negative impact of inadequate parking on the surrounding properties. Both the city council and the district court affirmed the commission’s decision. Lusk appealed, arguing that the commission had abused its discretion by applying the wrong legal standard to its grant of the permit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Horton, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership