Mendota Golf, LLP v. City of Mendota Heights

Mendota Golf, LLP (plaintiff) owned a 17.5-acre tract of property in the City of Mendota Heights (defendant). The property had been used as a golf course when it was acquired by Mendota Golf in 1995. The property was designated by the city’s zoning ordinance as residential, although the city’s comprehensive plan designated the property as “Golf Course.” In 2003, Mendota Golf decided to sell the property to a developer who intended to dismantle the golf course and construct single-family homes. Mendota Golf applied to the city requesting an amendment to the comprehensive plan to change the properties designation from “Golf Course” to “Low-Density Residential.” The city council denied the proposed amendment, stating that the amendment would negatively impact the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the city and would conflict with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. Mendota Golf then brought a mandamus action in district court. Mendota Golf requested that the court issue a writ of mandamus commanding the city to approve the amendment because the city’s zoning code expressly permitted single-family residences on the property, the “Golf Course” designation had no direct corresponding zoning classification, and the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance were incompatible. The district court agreed with Mendota Golf and issued a writ of mandamus commanding the city to approve Mendota Golf’s application. The city appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the district court. The city again appealed.